AD is shedding light on Kareem's career & ranking, imo (new all-time rankings inside)

Both AD and Kareem needed super-point guards like Oscar, Magic, and now Lebron to find synergies and have a great team.

Without these guys bird-feeding them, they're losers.

I mentioned last year that AD's teams are only as good as the guys getting him the ball, which explains his weak teams in previous years (I like Jrue Holiday, but there's a lot of teams with ballhandlers that compare or exceed him, hence AD's underwhelming teams in previous years)

But now AD has his Magic; he has his Oscar, just like Kareem did.. A ring is automatic barring injuries..

But this sheds light on the historical rankings - given this apparent dynamic (that AD and Kareem's teams are only as good as the guys getting them the ball), Kareem should certainly rank below Magic, and historic PG's like Magic and Oscar are more valuable than any big man not named Wilt or Shaq, whose physical dominance controlled games.

However, even though historic PG's have good teams without a dominant big man, they still seem to need an all-time big man to win a championship, while 2-way assassin-style players with scoring versatility, aka MJ, Kobe and even Kawhi seem immune from this need.

So to me, 2-way assassins with scoring versatility (MJ, Kobe) are the goats because they seemed to need the least help... So they're in the top 3 for me.. the historic PG's are next in line, with goat physical forces Wilt and Shaq coming next.. Kareem comes AFTER all these guys, and ahead of team-hoppers/super-team seekers Durant and Lebron..


1) MJ
2) Bird
3) Kobe
4) Magic
5) Wilt
6) Shaq
7) Kareem
8) Duncan (seriously considering Duncan over Kareem)
9) Russell
10) Oscar
11) Lebron
12) Dr. J
13) Durant


Something like that.. If Kawhi wins a couple rings with the Clippers, he would easily be top 10 because he fits the optimal player type of "2-way assassin with scoring versatility"

And you might be wondering how I have Bird #2 as a 2-way assassin... I think his defense is vastly underrated and he actually was a 2-way assassin.. Celtics had the #1 defense with Bird and his savvy/next-level basketball brain/instinct
.

Kobe at #3 all-time is laughably stupid.

If Lebron should win an "automatic title" with Anthony Davis...and if not, should be humiliated.

How the **** did Kobe only manage to win 3 titles in 8 years with a player far better than Anthony Davis, based on your own rankings if Kobe was considerably better than Lebron?

Anthony Davis> Michael Jordan

MJ needed more help than any player in league history, while also facing the weakest opponents in league history

[B]Pippen simply did more[/B]

[IMG]https://i.postimg.cc/k4RZypFv/FB-IMG-1525375107033.jpg[/IMG]

[B]MJ faced terribly weak contenders[/B]

[IMG]https://i.postimg.cc/YqTvqcxK/net-efficiency.png[/IMG]

[B]He had very little impact[/B]

[IMG]https://i.postimg.cc/FsbptnM4/Bulls_win_drop.png[/IMG]

[B]While playing in a terribly weak era[/B]

[IMG]https://i.postimg.cc/nz43C3NT/90s_spacing.png[/IMG]

[IMG]https://i.postimg.cc/ZqR9sXnB/hjklhjkl.jpg[/IMG]


[B]While having zero records[/B]

[IMG]https://i.postimg.cc/QCNZt6nR/23goog23.jpg[/IMG]

[size=4]Now stop this nonsense. Dont make SpaceDaddy2 spank you again[/size]

OP has literally made half a dozen different top 10's this year :lol

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]

Kobe at #3 all-time is laughably stupid.

[/QUOTE]
Kobe's ranking could be different depending on how dominant you think his frontcourt was with Pau and Bynum

It might indeed have been incredibly dominant, which would bump his ranking downwards.

But otherwise, he didn't need the help that anyone else on the list had

So I concede that his proper rank might be more in the 7-10 range

I also forgot to work historic PG Oscar into the mix and Lebron could be ranked higher too... so my rankings need some tweaking, but I think the concepts are there to come up with logical ranking.. 2-way assassins are the best (MJ/Kobe).. dominant physical forces 2nd (wilt/shaq).. goat PG's/bird-feeders are 3rd (Magic, Lebron)... bird-fed bigs are 4th (Russell, kareem).. and then the team-hoppers like Durant/lebron, and I think Dr. J should be in there (not as a team-hopper, but just overall as a player, he's close to Durant and lebron).. Duncan is an interesting case because he was not bird-fed and could control an offense himself - I rank him ahead of the goat pg's and bird-fed bigs, but behind the physical forces wilt and shaq.
.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents]OP has literally made half a dozen different top 10's this year :lol[/QUOTE]

Bruce is a lunatic what can we say :oldlol:

Never in my life haev I seen Bird so high except for that guy MerkinMuffly, but I don't think you're him. I don't know how so much credit can be doled out to Bird given his paucity on defense, but I agree that he might be the second best player to play since he played.

I'm considering putting pippen above MJ after reading your threads 3ball. you've built a very convincing case.

[QUOTE=3ball]Kobe's ranking could be different depending on how dominant you think his frontcourt was with Pau and Bynum

It might indeed have been incredibly dominant, which would bump his ranking downwards.

But otherwise, he didn't need the help that anyone else on the list had

So I concede that his proper rank might be more in the 7-10 range

I also forgot to work historic PG Oscar into the mix and Lebron could be ranked higher too... so my rankings need some tweaking, but I think the concepts are there to come up with logical ranking.. [B][COLOR="DarkRed"]2-way assassins/versatile scorers are the best.. goat PG's 2nd... dominant physical forces 3rd (wilt/shaq).. other goat bigs 4th (Duncan, Russell, kareem).. and then the team-hoppers like Durant/lebron, and I think Dr. J should be in there.[/COLOR][/B][/QUOTE]
^^^ based on that criteria, Lebron could be as high as #5 and as low as the teens..

I lean towards the latter due to team-hopping, spectacular teammate marginalization, and also issues regarding clutch and losing as the favorite/perennial underdogs/underachieving with great supporting talent/record losses.. and can't shoot

Kobe is 2, almost 3 peated with Pau (bynum averaged like 5ppg in the finals) and 3 peated with shaq and role players. And the best player i ever saw but MJ has the perfect career almost.

Not even Bird could win as much with his very own superteam as Kobe.

Kareem is overrated, needed magic and a superteam, 3d option Worthy winning finals mvp even.

Kobe and Jordan had the most help of anyone on that list relative to their competition

OP claiming the opposite is akin to Kyrie saying the world is flat or some shit. We're laughing at you 3ball. Your takes and opinions are so fukking bad. :lol :roll:

Why are Oscar and Wilt ahead of Lebron?

[QUOTE=AlternativeAcc.]Kobe and Jordan had the most help of anyone on that list relative to their competition

OP claiming the opposite is akin to Kyrie saying the world is flat or some shit. We're laughing at you 3ball. Your takes and opinions are so fukking bad. :lol :roll:[/QUOTE]

3ball is a gimmick account. It's not real. You're laughing at the wind.

[QUOTE=LAL]Kobe is 2, almost 3 peated with Pau (bynum averaged like 5ppg in the finals) and 3 peated with shaq and role players. And the best player i ever saw but MJ has the perfect career almost.

Not even Bird could win as much with his very own superteam as Kobe.

Kareem is overrated, needed magic and a superteam, 3d option Worthy winning finals mvp even.[/QUOTE]
I agree 100% about Kareem, and I'm also thinking that Magic could be overrated in my rankings

it's possible that the goat PG's like Magic should be below the physical forces like Wilt/Shaq, but still ahead of guys they had to bird feed like kareem and Russell...

Duncan is a tough one because he could create his own shot well and wasn't bird-fed.. I think he's better than kareem tbh.. the true rankings probably have MJ/Bird/Kobe as top 3, and then Wilt/Shaq, and then Duncan, Magic, Lebron, Oscar, and then the bird-fed Kareem and Russell, and then Durant/Dr. J and possibly Kawhi..

And realistically, Magic and Kareem can't both be ranked top 5, because they're too much help for each other, so that's in line with the aforementioned logic.

Comparing AD to Kareem.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

[QUOTE=LoneyROY7]Comparing AD to Kareem.

:roll: :roll: :roll:[/QUOTE]
well we already know that previous eras produced superior basketball players because the lack of spacing and hands-off defense made the game harder

regardless, AD's soft, basic game is the standard today, and he ranks similarly in today's game as kareem did in his day (AD probably gets MVP this year)

so it's a valid comparison, especially considering they're both bird-fed and need historic PG's to have good teams.

[QUOTE=3ball]well we already know that previous eras produced superior basketball players because the lack of spacing and hands-off defense made the game harder

regardless, AD's softer and more basic game is the standard today, [B]and he ranks similarly in today's game as kareem did in his day[/B] (AD probably gets MVP this year)[/QUOTE]
Kareem was a 6 time MVP, GTFOH :oldlol:

[QUOTE=3ball]well we already know that previous eras produced superior basketball players because the lack of spacing and hands-off defense made the game harder

regardless, AD's soft, basic game is the standard today, and he ranks similarly in today's game as kareem did in his day (AD probably gets MVP this year)[/QUOTE]

1st, AD has zero shot at the MVP. :oldlol: :oldlol:

2nd, Kareem had an unstoppable shot that he could get off at any time and on anyone. I would dare anyone to tell me what AD's go-to-move even is.

[QUOTE=LoneyROY7]1st, AD has zero shot at the MVP. :oldlol: :oldlol:

2nd, Kareem had an unstoppable shot that he could get off at any time and on anyone. I would dare anyone to tell me what AD's go-to-move even is.[/QUOTE]
I agree that kareem was far better then AD and had the best go-to move in history

and could therefore create his shot quite well

but he still needed to be bird-fed to get that sky-hook off

he didn't quite have it like Duncan, who could square up and make plays and punish defenses - Duncan didn't need no magic or Oscar.. a couple short euros is all he needed (basically nothing compared to kareem)

as you can see, i'm adjusting the rankings as we're discussing them.. I now have Duncan ahead of bird-fed, historic-pg-needing kareem, and i've bumped magic down below the physical force bigs wilt/shaq and also below duncan.. so magic is appropriately ranked with lebron and oscar around the 7-9 range

[QUOTE=3ball][B]I agree that kareem was far better then AD and had the best go-to move in history[/B]

and could therefore create his shot quite well

but he still needed to be bird-fed to get that sky-hook off

he didn't quite have it like Duncan, who could square up and make plays and punish defenses - Duncan didn't need no magic or Oscar.. a couple short euros is all he needed (basically nothing compared to kareem)[/QUOTE]

Good, so stop making these dumbass threads then.

[QUOTE=Shogon]3ball is a gimmick account. It's not real. You're laughing at the wind.[/QUOTE]
It's real

That's actually a disturbing revelation so i'll pause for a second.




But yes, he's incredibly easy to read and pick apart. His tactics are weak, and his overarching arguments are poor and unstable, which forces him to deploy said weak tactics to mask them. It's a viscous cycle. That's why you see 5-10 new threads like this a week, he's constantly having to formulate and revise nonsensical narratives to justify his beliefs.

It's literally like a retard who thinks the world is flat so he ignores logic, evidence, and reason in favor of pseudo-science and fallaciousness.


Obviously very sad, but moreso comical IMO. :lol

[QUOTE=AlternativeAcc.]It's real

That's actually a disturbing revelation so i'll pause for a second.




But yes, he's incredibly easy to read and pick apart. His tactics are weak, and his overarching arguments are poor and unstable, which forces him to deploy said weak tactics to mask them. It's a viscous cycle. That's why you see 5-10 new threads like this a week, he's constantly having to formulate and revise nonsensical narratives to justify his beliefs.

It's literally like a retard who thinks the world is flat so he ignores logic, evidence, and reason in favor of pseudo-science and fallaciousness.


Obviously very sad, but moreso comical IMO. :lol[/QUOTE]

Goodness :roll: Sad

.
[B]Adjusted rankings based on discussion itt:[/B]


1) MJ
2) Bird
3) Kobe
4) Wilt
5) Shaq
6) Duncan
7) Magic
8) Kareem
9) Russell
10) Lebron
11) Oscar
12) Dr. J
13) Durant


[B]1) 2-way assassins with scoring versatility are first tier (mj/bird/kobe)

2) goat physical force bigs are 2nd tier (wilt/shaq)

3) goat PG's that bird-feed are 3rd tier (magic, lebron)

4) bird-fed bigs are the 4th tier (kareem, russell)

- the exceptions are Duncan, who was ranked AHEAD of goat pg's because he wasn't bird-fed and could carry teams on his own, unlike Kareem and Russell.. and also goat PG oscar, who was ranked below the goat pg's and bird-fed bigs[/B]


[I]Other notes[/I]

- Realistically, Magic and Kareem can't both be ranked top 5, because they're too much help for each other, so that's in line with the aforementioned logic.

- I could almost put Duncan over Shaq - Shaq had Kobe when he beat Duncan, and Duncan still beat Shaq/Kobe once in their prime (03').

- I [U]wanted[/U] to put Oscar over Lebron because was a goat shooter and would've won more chips if he had great teammates earlier in his career.... however, I couldn't get over his rudimentary, basic handle and put him over Bron with a straight face..
.

[QUOTE=AlternativeAcc.]It's real

That's actually a disturbing revelation so i'll pause for a second.




But yes, he's incredibly easy to read and pick apart. His tactics are weak, and his overarching arguments are poor and unstable, which forces him to deploy said weak tactics to mask them. It's a viscous cycle. That's why you see 5-10 new threads like this a week, he's constantly having to formulate and revise nonsensical narratives to justify his beliefs.

It's literally like a retard who thinks the world is flat so he ignores logic, evidence, and reason in favor of pseudo-science and fallaciousness.


Obviously very sad, but moreso comical IMO. :lol[/QUOTE]

Actually, no... it's not real.

And I know this for a "fact"(as much as anyone can ever 'know' something) for two reasons...

1) He posted in a thread he didn't create... a couple of years back (deleted... thanks Jeff for purging a year+ of topics) saying that Kobe would absolutely destroy MJ 1 on 1... I called him out on it, he laughed, weakly tried to defend it, and everyone ignored it as is usually the case on this site when I point things out unless I'm being inflammatory or someone is making fun of me.

2) Kblaze has straight up stated that he's an alt. While kblaze does not have access to IPs, he does have access to see deleted posts, so when someone screws up and posts something on the wrong account, deletes it, and posts it on the right one... he sees that.


3ball is a gimmick account.

I'm pretty sure I know who it is, but I don't care. It's unimportant. What is important, is that it's an alt.

I will say this.

While I don't agree with where Kareem is in the rankings in the OP, I do think Kareem tends to get a bit over-rated at times.

Still, easily, one of the best players of all-time, but his career was greatly impacted in a positive way by Magic's arrival. Kareem's internal "give-a-shit" meter was never super high...he's even talked about this before iirc.

Long story short...I don't think it is crazy to take Duncan over Kareem. Part of that is because I still feel Duncan is under-rated...and the other part is that I think Kareem benefitted a little more than people realize from Magic and some of those Lakers squads.

[QUOTE=LoneyROY7]Good, so stop making these dumbass threads then.[/QUOTE]
actually, how many scoring titles did kareem win with that skyhook?

MJ won at least 3 scoring titles with the fadeaway (96-98'), so his fadeaway is the goat move

people forget that MJ made over 700 jumpers in 1997 - that's 250 more than Curry or Lebron's high, at better efficiency than Lebron's best season

so mj's fadeaway is infact the goat move, and better than kareem's skyhook ([U]bird-fed[/U] skyhook)

[QUOTE=SpaceJam2]Goodness :roll: Sad[/QUOTE]
It's like a reality show to me man, 3ball's insanity gives me a dopamine hit everytime which ensures I come back to shit on him at least once a week :lol


LeBron Fam is eating so unbelievably good :banana:

[QUOTE=Shogon]Actually, no... it's not real.

And I know this for a "fact"(as much as anyone can ever 'know' something) for two reasons...

1) He posted in a thread he didn't create... a couple of years back (deleted... thanks Jeff for purging a year+ of topics) saying that Kobe would absolutely destroy MJ 1 on 1... I called him out on it, he laughed, weakly tried to defend it, and everyone ignored it as is usually the case on this site when I point things out unless I'm being inflammatory or someone is making fun of me.

2) Kblaze has straight up stated that he's an alt. While kblaze does not have access to IPs, he does have access to see deleted posts, so when someone screws up and posts something on the wrong account, deletes it, and posts it on the right one... he sees that.


3ball is a gimmick account.

I'm pretty sure I know who it is, but I don't care. It's unimportant. What is important, is that it's an alt.[/QUOTE]
LOL

that's interesting. I'm definitely willing to accept hard evidence, but it looks as though you just have some anecdotes that may or may not have validity behind them. Screenshots, man!

Also, even if what you're saying is true, it doesn't necessarily prove that 3ball isn't being genuine. If anything it moreso proves he has schizophrenia and other serious mental illnesses. Which we all sort of already expect in the 1st place.. lol

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]I will say this.

While I don't agree with where Kareem is in the rankings in the OP, I do think Kareem tends to get a bit over-rated at times.

Still, easily, one of the best players of all-time, but his career was greatly impacted in a positive way by Magic's arrival. Kareem's internal "give-a-shit" meter was never super high...he's even talked about this before iirc.

Long story short...I don't think it is crazy to take Duncan over Kareem. Part of that is because I still feel Duncan is under-rated...and the other part is that I think Kareem benefitted a little more than people realize from Magic and some of those Lakers squads.[/QUOTE]
indeed, the main gist of this thread is that AD has shed light on Kareem's game because they both needed goat PG's to have a great team (or even a [I]good[/I] team).. so the goat PG's and bird-[u]feeders[/u] like Magic and Lebron should be ahead of bird-[U]fed[/U] bigs like Kareem and Russell

And this means that guys like Duncan gets bumped up a few spots, since he could legitimately carry his own team and wasn't bird-fed..

Ultimately, 2-way assassins/versatile scorers are the 1st tier... goat physical bigs are 2nd tier (wilt, shaq)… Duncan is in his own 3rd tier ahead of the 4th tier (goat bird-feeders like magic/lebron) and 5th tier (bird-fed bigs like kareem/russell)

the adjusted rankings are above (post #24) - other people's rankings will differ of course, but the gist of the thread was that AD has shed light on other bigs that needed goat PG's to have even a good team, let alone great team.

[QUOTE=3ball]indeed, the main gist of this thread is that AD has shed light on Kareem's game because they both needed goat PG's to have a great team (or even a [I]good[/I] team).. so the goat PG's and bird-[u]feeders[/u] like Magic and Lebron should be ahead of bird-[U]fed[/U] bigs like Kareem and Russell

And this means that guys like Duncan gets bumped up a few spots, since he could legitimately carry his own team and wasn't bird-fed..

Ultimately, 2-way assassins/versatile scorers are the 1st tier... goat physical bigs are 2nd tier (wilt, shaq)… Duncan is in his own 3rd tier ahead of the 4th tier (goat pgs, aka magic/lebron) and 5th tier (bird-fed bigs, aka kareem/russell)

the adjusted rankings are above (post #24) - other people's rankings will differ of course, but the gist of the thread was that AD has shed light on other bigs that needed goat PG's to have even a good team, let alone great team.[/QUOTE]

I disagree mainly because you put Kobe in that first tier and there just isn't any evidence...that him over Lebron/Duncan/Shaq/Kareem/Russell/Magic/Hakeem...let alone other guys like KG/Dirk/Curry/Wade/West...is going to win more with similar help.

You are like a person that thinks something made in the image of something gives it inherent value. A nearly perfect copy of the Mona Lisa is worth a tiny fraction of the original.

Just because Kobe played like MJ...doesn't make him MJ.

He was absolutely great, no doubt, but he's not in that elite of the elite top group all-time. He's a fringe top 10 player.

[QUOTE=AlternativeAcc.]LOL

that's interesting. I'm definitely willing to accept hard evidence, but it looks as though you just have some anecdotes that may or may not have validity behind them. Screenshots, man!

[B]Also, even if what you're saying is true, it doesn't necessarily prove that 3ball isn't being genuine. If anything it moreso proves he has schizophrenia and other serious mental illnesses. Which we all sort of already expect in the 1st place.. lol[/B][/QUOTE]

Maybe so. That bolded paragraph is entirely possible.

I didn't save the Kobe comment... it's long since gone.

I don't know if kblaze saying he's an alt is gone but it's too much to dig through for me to care.

I didn't make it up. Oh well... maybe one day the facts will come out.

I agree with the premise that the great bigs generally need a great guard, but it isn't because they need to be "bird-fed". It's because they aren't great at getting the other guys on the team easy shots. One guy scoring at will isn't enough to win consistently in the playoffs (see MJ '86). You need a system, elite guard or even better both to have that kind of success.

Once you have something in place to get other guys scoring, then that elite big man can have playoff success.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]I disagree mainly because you put Kobe in that first tier and there just isn't any evidence...that him over Lebron/Duncan/Shaq/Kareem/Russell/Magic/Hakeem...let alone other guys like KG/Dirk/Curry/Wade...is going to win more with similar help.

You are like a person that thinks something made in the image of something gives it inherent value. A nearly perfect copy of the Mona Lisa is worth a tiny fraction of the original.

Just because Kobe played like MJ...doesn't make him MJ.

He was absolutely great, no doubt, but he's not in that elite of the elite top group all-time. He's a fringe top 10 player.[/QUOTE]
He's trying to get around math

He knows the closest player to MJ is Kobe, but Kobe is fringe top 15. Saying Kobe plays like Jordan is the same as saying [I]Jordan plays like Kobe [/I]. If he pretends that Kobe is better than he actually was, it elevates Jordan ('because even poor mans Jordan is top 5! See guys, I'm right after all!')


Obviously this is all nonsense and delusion, but you see his weak tactics in real time. :oldlol:

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]I disagree mainly because you put Kobe in that first tier and there just isn't any evidence...that him over Lebron/Duncan/Shaq/Kareem/Russell/Magic/Hakeem...let alone other guys like KG/Dirk/Curry/Wade...is going to win more with similar help.

You are like a person that thinks something made in the image of something gives it inherent value. A nearly perfect copy of the Mona Lisa is worth a tiny fraction of the original.

Just because Kobe played like MJ...doesn't make him MJ.

He was absolutely great, no doubt, but he's not in that elite of the elite top group all-time. He's a fringe top 10 player.[/QUOTE]
you might be right and I like your mona lisa analogy

I am biased towards kobe and always will be..

but you might be wrong and the historical record might agree.. he [I]did[/I] get it done once he got a bosh-level player... his all-round skills and scoring versatility [I]do[/I] translate to any format of the game, like international play where he excelled and proved superior when our country's pride was on the line.. also, he and mj are the only guys to win multiple rings with a lone all-star teammate..

so there is some historical evidence that he's a guy who wins automatically once he has a minimal level of help, like MJ did.. like, he got bosh (i mean pau) and it was automatic - we all knew he would win and that's all he needed to win.. whereas lebron gets multiple young studs and it's [B]still a question mark[/B] whether he'll win and whether he needs more help - he's perennial underdog in a spot where kobe was perennial favorite.. that makes kobe better, and it's due to kobe's skills that he can win more with less - Lebron's limited scoring/attacking versatility marginalizes teammates, which makes him a worse player - again, its a SKILL thing

I don't really agree with Kobe as 3, but that's a argument for a different day. As far as Magic and Kareem not both being in the top five, I would make this analogy. If Bird had gone to the Laker and Magic to the Celtics, I think Kareem would have even more rings. I also think the lakers in 1980 would have set a all time rs win total with Bird. So if that had happened would you say Bird and Kareem couldn't be in the top five.

[QUOTE=3ball]you might be right and I like your mona lisa analogy

I am biased towards kobe and always will be..

but you might be wrong and the historical record might agree.. he [I]did[/I] get it done once he got a bosh-level player... his all-round skills and scoring versatility [I]do[/I] translate to any format of the game, like international play where he excelled and proved superior when our country's pride was on the line.. also, he and mj are the only guys to win multiple rings with a lone all-star teammate..

so there is some historical evidence that he's a guy who wins automatically once he has a minimal level of help, like MJ did.. like, he got bosh (i mean pau) and it was automatic - we all knew he would win and that's all he needed to win.. whereas lebron gets multiple young studs and it's still a question mark whether he'll win and whether he needs more help - he's perennial underdog in a spot where kobe was perennial favorite.. that makes kobe better, and it's due to kobe's skills that he can win more with less - Lebron's limited scoring/attacking versatility style marginalizes teammates, which makes him a worse player - again, its a SKILL thing[/QUOTE]

I think context really matters though for championships.

Look at your point comparing Lebron and Kobe. For starters, Lebron is much later in his career with considerably more mileage...but even ignoring that. The competition is likely to be way better this year than in 09.

Look at the kind of teams the best players had that year. There is absolutely no team that will even touch what the Clippers will be if healthy.

You have to talk about it all...not just titles won...but actually the impact of said players.

It is similar to giving Lebron full credit for making 8 straight finals. Of course we shouldn't, his competition in the East was a ****ing joke during that time. Doesn't make him a worse player or something, and doing that was still impressive...just like Kobe winning as much as he did was impressive, but we have to use context.

Of course it is all ultimately subjective, but I think we have enough information to say nothing was "automatic" about Kobe beating the likes of Dirk/Wade/Lebron/KG/Duncan in that era if they had equal help and coaching.

Like, just for fun, imagine Kobe not playing with Shaq...and instead playing with KG's help or somebody like that...but Dirk/Shaq or Dirk/KG were on the same team. He isn't winning shit. Does that make him a worse player? I'd agrue no...and if we argue no...then I think more nuance is needed on this stuff.

[QUOTE=colts19]

As far as Magic and Kareem not both being in the top five, [B][COLOR="DarkRed"]I would make this analogy[/COLOR][/B]. If Bird had gone to the Laker and Magic to the Celtics, I think Kareem would have even more rings. I also think the lakers in 1980 would have set a all time rs win total with Bird. So if that had happened would you say Bird and Kareem couldn't be in the top five.

[/QUOTE]
I basically agree with you, but using your logic, it makes sense to say that 5 rings with kareem = not top 5, but the 7 or 8 rings that Bird would've won = top 5

and in theory, kareem should still be out of the top 5 if bird got him more rings..


[QUOTE=colts19]

I don't really agree with Kobe as 3, but that's a argument for a different day.

[/QUOTE]
I am biased towards kobe and always will be..

but you might be wrong and the historical record might agree.. he [I]did[/I] get it done once he got a bosh-level player... his all-round skills and scoring versatility [I]do[/I] translate to any format of the game, like international play where he excelled and proved superior when our country's pride was on the line.. also, he and mj are the only guys to win multiple rings with a lone all-star teammate..

so there is some historical evidence that he's a guy who wins automatically once he has a minimal level of help, like MJ did.. like, he got bosh (i mean pau) and it was automatic - we all knew he would win and that's all he needed to win.. whereas lebron gets multiple young studs and [B]it's still a question mark[/B] whether he'll win and whether he needs more help - he's perennial underdog in a spot where kobe was perennial favorite.. that makes kobe better, and it's due to kobe's skills that he can win more with less - Lebron's limited scoring/attacking versatility marginalizes teammates, which makes him a worse player - again, its a SKILL thing

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]I think context really matters though for championships.

Look at your point comparing Lebron and Kobe. For starters, Lebron is much later in his career with considerably more mileage...but even ignoring that. The competition is likely to be way better this year than in 09.

Look at the kind of teams the best players had that year. There is absolutely no team that will even touch what the Clippers will be if healthy.

You have to talk about it all...not just titles won...but actually the impact of said players.

It is similar to giving Lebron full credit for making 8 straight finals. Of course we shouldn't, his competition in the East was a ****ing joke during that time. Doesn't make him a worse player or something, and doing that was still impressive...just like Kobe winning as much as he did was impressive, but we have to use context.

Of course it is all ultimately subjective, but I think we have enough information to say nothing was "automatic" about Kobe beating the likes of Dirk/Wade/Lebron/KG/Duncan in that era if they had equal help and coaching.

Like, just for fun, imagine Kobe not playing with Shaq...and instead playing with KG's help or somebody like that...but Dirk/Shaq or Dirk/KG were on the same team. He isn't winning shit. Does that make him a worse player? I'd agrue no...and if we argue no...then I think more nuance is needed on this stuff.[/QUOTE]
Context is not fantasy, put context on magic, bird and kareem's career compared to kobe's.

[QUOTE=LAL]Context is not fantasy, put context on magic, bird and kareem's career compared to kobe's.[/QUOTE]

What do you mean?

This would be a point if I thought Magic or Kareem or Bird was better than Kobe based merely on how many titles they won or team success.

Which I don't...and is the exact thing I'm arguing against.