View Single Post
Old 10-16-2012, 06:53 PM   #33
The go-to-guy
lakerfreak's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 14,360
Default Re: IF Kobe gets Ring #6

Originally Posted by Frank Foley
It was also an era where fouls were harder to come by, where people driving into the lane got bodychecked and suffered the occasional broken bone without getting the whistle. It's notable that Kobe really struggled with his shooting and turnovers in the year just prior to the rule banning handchecks on the perimeter--a rule, btw, that was a complete boon to explosive perimeter scorers across the league. You think Logo wouldn't appreciate having people back off an inch or two because they couldn't grab and push him while he was driving past them? With his jumper?

Look, Kobe would be great in any era, but it's fallacious to just assume he'd be that much better in the '70s after you just implied that you can't compare different eras.

According to internet sources, this hand checking rule was implemented 2007 so get back to me on that if its inaccurate. Looking at Kobe's statistics from 2005 until 2008, his numbers have been lurking around the same general neighbor hood of about 30 points, 3-4 turnovers (he handles the ball a lot), and lastly, it is very interesting to me regarding his free throw numbers. Back when hand checking was allowed, Kobe actually had taken more free throw attempts, before the year 2007. After the hand checking rule was implemented, you see the attempts every year decrease. 819 attempted in 2006, and then come 2007, it immediately shot down to the 700's and never went back up. This can be attributed to the zone defense which allows a team to basically hound a player, without it being deemed "illegal defense". Every rule and every era had its trade-offs frank foley. Hand checking allows a guy to beat the crap out of you, but the zone defense allows 3 players on average to hound you.

I did say you can't compare different eras, but I was also speaking about the evolvement of the game. The "moves" are advanced as these new guys come in and find different ways to humiliate defenses, and coaching is also different.
If you put for example, a doctor today, back in time in the 1800's, that doctor would have put all of those types of "treatments" to shame with his advanced knowledge, experience, and technology.

Um. Kareem has a strong case for not just having the better career, but being the greatest player of all time.

Don't know why you're focusing on this. Simply a matter of opinion. Magic continued to win without Kareem. Won more championships, therefore to me, his career was more successful. I did not say one negative thing about Kareem. If you ask fans all around the U.S. who is their top ten, I guarantee you not one list would come close to another. This also sounds like you don't think Magic has a run on being greatest of all time. Accomplishing so much in a short career always makes one wonder what "could have" happened.

Kobe is unguardable in the sense that he has a ridiculously high skillset and shoots the ball a ton. So, either way, he's gonna get his, but it may not be at high efficiency. His career shooting percentage is barely above the league average. He shot 45% during his 35 ppg season, which is incredible given the difficulty of his shots and the burden he took on every night, but let's not make believe that he was doing whatever he wanted out there. Even though scoring efficiency was higher in the '80's Magic (and Jordan, if you wanna throw him into the discussion) still shot the ball at a level far higher than that of their peers.

When I think unguardable, I think of someone who has many options. If Kobe had one side of the court completely shut down, he has about 4 different backup plans of how he can get the shot off. Someone like Magic Johnson on the other hand, would not shoot if he had no possible alternative to score. Rather he'd wait until the next possession, or simply use his amazing court vision to get someone else to receive the glory, which is a great thing btw. What I am saying is, as a one on one player, Kobe made so many difficult shots over many defenders. It didn't matter if 3 guys were on Kobe. It wasn't ever a guarantee that the 3 defenders would come away successful. There was always that doubt of "I don't think we can stop him". Michael Jordan is the GOAT. Im not including him in this simply because this is a discussion of "Who is the greatest laker of all time".

When Kobe was at his apex, he was about as good as anyone who ever lived. But night in, night out? There are a handful of players I'd take over him for continued, consistent excellence, including Magic and Kareem.

I don't think inconsistency is a word that should describe Kobe. Sure he had bad shooting nights. But who nowadays didn't have bad shooting nights? Even with a bad shooting nights, he commanded double teams which created opportunities for others. If he wasn't scoring, he did other things. Look at his bad shooting against the celtics in game 7 of the NBA finals. He came away with 15 rebounds, and that was significant because the team who led in rebounds every game, won the game.

Shaq couldn't win without an elite guard, sure, but Kobe couldn't win without an elite center. Pau gets a lot of grief on this site for being soft, but he and Odom (and Drew, to a far lesser extent) made up the best frontcourt in the entire league for a few years.

If Pau Gasol was an elite center/forward, why didn't he lead the grizzlies to any playoff wins? 0-12 his first three tries. He made Kobe a lot better because of how smart he was, but Kobe overall made him the better player. Phil Jackson overall made Pau the better player. They helped him get over his "soft" reputation when needed most. Improved from 14 ppg to 24 ppg in both finals series against the celtics. Drew, like you said, to a far lesser extent. Odom wasn't elite but he was the best asset to have. The point is, Bynum Odom Pau probably don't add up to a Shaquille O'Neal in his prime, which is debatable as well. That being said, Kobe won without Shaq. It was a big deal at the time. It sure as heck shut the media up lol.

Magic generated a MFT of discussion earlier in his career. Google "Tragic Johnson" and "Paul Westhead Lakers," and you'll see that it wasn't all ice cream and candy during the '80's. He overcame his fair share of adversity as well.

He probably did, but it wasn't nearly as much as the "drama" that we'd seen guys like Kobe go through.

I think everyone is entitled to believe what they want to believe about Kobe, but I don't think enough of us are giving Magic a fair shot. This is just my opinion, but there's a holy trinity of perimeter players (Jordan, Bird, Magic), and a holy trinity of centers (Wilt, Russell, Kareem). To break into either of those groups (again, in my personal opinion), you have to be something really special across the board--passing, rebounding, shooting, winning, defense, efficiency. Kobe's great, but to me, he didn't do enough to break into that group.

Fair enough in regards to the holy trinity of players. Now let me ask you, what did Kobe not do yet?
lakerfreak is offline   Reply With Quote