kobe>bird

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]And wouldn't that be dependent on a number of things and your specific criteria?

Couldn't you understand someone valuing longevity and titles heavily ranking Kobe ahead of Bird when its all done?[/QUOTE]

If Kobe were to retire today, I'd be prone to rank him below Bird. Some people may value titles and other various intangibles differently than me, but from what I've seen from their games and the information I've gathered, I just can't fathom how Kobe would be ahead of Bird (even WITH the differences I just spoke of). Bird was more dominant (evident by his MVPs and playoff performances), lead three teams to championships against some of the GREATEST teams ever assembled, was more clutch, had less blemishes in his career (be it in do-or-die situations or flat-out just playing inconsistent basketball), etc. I can go on, but you get the picture.

I just don't see it - so no, I couldn't understand.

[QUOTE=pauk]Who would disagree with that?

Kobe might had better man to man defense tho.... but Bird could do EVERYTHING else better.... literally everything... just name it...[/QUOTE]
Kobe was a better scorer than Bird was especially if we are talking prime/peak years.

[QUOTE=rodman91]He averaged over 35 ppg per game vs Lakers in finals.

[/QUOTE]

And shot 40%, missing 20+ shots a game.

[QUOTE=pauk]

LARRY BIRD WAS EASILY ONE OF THE MOST COMPLETE PLAYERS IN NBA HISTORY..... HE COULD DO EVERYTHING WITH THE BEST OF THEM.......[/QUOTE]
Answer me this then.

If a player came in the league next year, joined the worst team (say, Timberwolves), turned them into a 66 win team, wins the championship, and averages 39ppg, 7apg, 8rpg, 2stl, 2blk, 50% shooting over the season and playoffs, then retires the following year.

Is he the best ever?

[QUOTE=catch24]If Kobe were to retire today, I'd be prone to rank him below Bird. Some people may value titles and other various intangibles differently than me, but from what I've seen from their games and the information I've gathered, I just can't fathom how Kobe would be ahead of Bird (even WITH the differences I just spoke of). Bird was more dominant (evident by his MVPs and playoff performances), lead three teams to championships against some of the GREATEST teams ever assembled, was more clutch, had less blemishes in his career (be it in do-or-die situations or flat-out just playing inconsistent basketball), etc. I can go on, but you get the picture.

I just don't see it - so no, I couldn't understand.[/QUOTE]

I agree with Bird over Kobe, but you acted like its absurd to rank Kobe over Bird all time. It really isn't.....depending on what criteria is used.

Agree to disagree.

[QUOTE=Round Mound][B]Don`t forget to mention The Team`s Bird Faced in the difficult 80s.

Don`t forget about Gary Payton, Glen Rice, Karl Malone etc that played with Kobe as a 2nd Fiddle To Shaq

Don`t forget to mention Gasol : a Future HOF, Bynum and Odom: Best Sixth Man: A Big 3.[/B][/QUOTE]


Who Bird faced isn't the issue. The point is, he played with 4 other HOFers, on the same team, at the same time, while in his prime.

Kobe played with Payton (35), Rice (31,32) and Malone (40) while they were at the ass end of their careers. The only Celtic comparable to that, is Walton. Leave him off, and there are still 3 HOF players, with Bird, in their primes. Parish, from 27 to 32. McHale, 23-28. Johnson, 26-13. So please, don't come at me with that corny ass argument about Rice, Payton and Malone when each one was past their best years and Bird had his teammates in their absolute primes.



Its funny how when people downplay Kobe, its because, "he played on a stacked team and thats the only reason he won any title".

Yet, somehow, Bird and Magic get a pass for playing on truly stacked teams. Their all time ranking never suffers one bit either. I love the hypocrisy.


So, with that, eat a turd.

[QUOTE=catch24]To add onto that, DMAVS41 - I don't think people are "morons" for ranking Kobe>Bird all-time. I do think they're knowledge of Bird's career is lacking though. More often than not, the people that do rank Kobe ahead of Bird are trolls and/or have limited perspective.[/QUOTE]

I know about Bird's career. A lifelong hoops fan that was reading Basketball Digest at age 8 when the other kids were reading little kids books. And for me I go with Kobe. That doesn't mean I don't know about Bird's career. Kobe can dominate both sides of the ball in a manner Bird can't. And on a GOAT list, Bryant has already arguably passed Bird by. You can't deny Kobe's accomplishments. But if someone said Bird I can dig it and WON'T doubt their knowledge. Unless they say some dumb shit.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]I agree with Bird over Kobe, but you acted like its absurd to rank Kobe over Bird all time. It really isn't.....depending on what criteria is used.

Agree to disagree.[/QUOTE]

[I]Right now[/I] I do think it would be kind of absurd. So because Kobe has 2 more titles and "better defense" (defense that he hasn't played in how many years now?), people want to rank him ahead of the greatest SF ever?

Doesn't make any sense to me, dude.

[QUOTE=catch24]And shot 40%, missing 20+ shots a game.[/QUOTE]

Same like Kobe's overall finals.:oldlol:

If a guy puts more than 35 ppg on finals, rest is just making excuses.

[QUOTE=RRR3]T-Mac had more raw talent than Kobe.[/QUOTE]

U can say that! But that's because Mac had many of Kobe's skills in a 6'10 body. But that if Mac were 6'6 that would make a difference. But its not a stretch to say Kobe has more raw talent than T Mac either.

[QUOTE=bizil]I know about Bird's career. A lifelong hoops fan that was reading Basketball Digest at age 8 when the other kids were reading little kids books. And for me I go with Kobe. That doesn't mean I don't know about Bird's career. Kobe can dominate both sides of the ball in a manner Bird can't. And on a GOAT list, Bryant has already arguably passed Bird by. You can't deny Kobe's accomplishments. But if someone said Bird I can dig it and WON'T doubt their knowledge. Unless they say some dumb shit.[/QUOTE]


Heres a prime example of someone saying dumb shit,


"Don`t forget about Gary Payton, Glen Rice, Karl Malone etc that played with Kobe as a 2nd Fiddle To Shaq"


Yea, because a group of guys who were in their 30s and one who was actually 40 years old, compares to a group of guys who were in their 20s when they played with eachother.

[QUOTE=bizil]I know about Bird's career. A lifelong hoops fan that was reading Basketball Digest at age 8 when the other kids were reading little kids books. And for me I go with Kobe. That doesn't mean I don't know about Bird's career. Kobe can dominate both sides of the ball in a manner Bird can't. And on a GOAT list, Bryant has already arguably passed Bird by. You can't deny Kobe's accomplishments. But if someone said Bird I can dig it and WON'T doubt their knowledge. Unless they say some dumb shit.[/QUOTE]

I disagree somewhat. Kobe was a great defender during his peak/prime, but what about the last few years (making unjustified all-defensive teams over Wade), where people like to credit him for playing longer than Bird? At what point do you actually start breaking down and gauging individual play? Kobe should be applauded for playing longer despite performing/playing like a shell of his former self? During his prime, Bird was better than Kobe on the offensive end due to his play-making ability while simultaneously playing good-to-great defense (evident by his steals/blocks/all-defensive teams; difference is they were justified). So, I'm not sure what you meant by Bird not doing it in the manner Kobe could.

[QUOTE=rodman91]Same like Kobe's overall finals.:oldlol: [/QUOTE]

I never claimed Kobe was "raping" anyone, much less in the Finals.

We were talking about Kobe 'shutting down' players (like Iverson), [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyLg15UIRLY"]and he did[/URL]

[QUOTE=The Iron Fist]Who Bird faced isn't the issue. The point is, he played with 4 other HOFers, on the same team, at the same time, while in his prime.

Kobe played with Payton (35), Rice (31,32) and Malone (40) while they were at the ass end of their careers. The only Celtic comparable to that, is Walton. Leave him off, and there are still 3 HOF players, with Bird, in their primes. Parish, from 27 to 32. McHale, 23-28. Johnson, 26-13. So please, don't come at me with that corny ass argument about Rice, Payton and Malone when each one was past their best years and Bird had his teammates in their absolute primes.



Its funny how when people downplay Kobe, its because, "he played on a stacked team and thats the only reason he won any title".

Yet, somehow, Bird and Magic get a pass for playing on truly stacked teams. Their all time ranking never suffers one bit either. I love the hypocrisy.


So, with that, eat a turd.[/QUOTE]

Exactly right! I've seen games where the Lakers have Magic, Scott (criminally underrated and easily an All Star SG), Worthy, McAdoo, and Kareem on the floor together. That's sick right there having a guy like McAdoo coming off your bench. The Lakers, Celtics, Sixers, and many teams of that era had stacked deck teams. Meaning having 4-5 All Star (or some teams HOFers) on a team. It's not like that these days.

Kobe plays with one HOFer in his prime in Shaq people had the nerve to say Kobe was just a Robin. If anything it was Superman-Batman or Batman-Batman however u wanna put it.

[B]The Iron Fist[/B]

78-79 Celtics, some of them;
30 year old Dave Cowens
23 year old Cedric Maxwell
30 year old Chris Ford
30 year old Tiny Archibald
32 year old Jo-Jo White
27 year old Bob McAdoo (for 20 games)
Team Record: 29-53

---

In 1979-80 season, Bird joined Boston Celtics and their record was 61-21 for Bird's rookie season.

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/BOS/1979.html[/url]
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/BOS/1980.html[/url]

Now, shut up.