NBA Buy/Sell...
- Thread starter dawgstudent
- Start date
Kobe was easily the MVP this year, and has been the best player in the postseason. His damn teammates are the ones who can't step up, and he has repeatedly in the postseason. Just look at the furious comeback in game 2.
Even Jordan had bad playoff games. That said, he isn't in Jordan's league yet, but he ain't real far.
Even Jordan had bad playoff games. That said, he isn't in Jordan's league yet, but he ain't real far.
Easiest sell ever.
I can name several others in the NBA today that I think are better. That's not to take anything away from Bryant. He's a great player. But Lebron took Cleveland which has a far worse team to game 7 against the Celtics. Remember last year when Lebron carved up the Pistons in game 5? Tim Dincan. How awesome is he? And Kobe could have guarded Paul Pierce, but I think he's too busy picking his jock off the floor. Furthermore, CP3 does more with less than anyone except maybe Lebron. Kobe has the team, he just isn't that great of a leader.
Do I seriously believe Pierce is a better player than Bryant? No. But he's on a better team and I say that to refute people who will say Lebron isn't a better player than Bryant because Lebron doesn't have any rings. Because if you judge who is better by how the team is then the best player in the NBA is the best player on the best team. And that logic is just dumb. Kobe had Shaq. Lebron has.... Ilgauskas?
I can name several others in the NBA today that I think are better. That's not to take anything away from Bryant. He's a great player. But Lebron took Cleveland which has a far worse team to game 7 against the Celtics. Remember last year when Lebron carved up the Pistons in game 5? Tim Dincan. How awesome is he? And Kobe could have guarded Paul Pierce, but I think he's too busy picking his jock off the floor. Furthermore, CP3 does more with less than anyone except maybe Lebron. Kobe has the team, he just isn't that great of a leader.
Do I seriously believe Pierce is a better player than Bryant? No. But he's on a better team and I say that to refute people who will say Lebron isn't a better player than Bryant because Lebron doesn't have any rings. Because if you judge who is better by how the team is then the best player in the NBA is the best player on the best team. And that logic is just dumb. Kobe had Shaq. Lebron has.... Ilgauskas?
Kobe had Shaq. You tihnk he'd have won those 3 rings if it wasn't for Shaq? I don't. When Jordan was Kobe's age he didn't have anyone near the talent of a Shaq on his team. Pippen would become that player, but judging who is better based on how many rings they have isn't a real good argument. I have the same numberof rings as Karl Malone. Does that mean I'm as good as him? I'm not even close. He just didn't have the supporting cast (besides Stockton) and he also had to go up against Jordan.
Jordan was carrying his team to its second title at this same point in his life, and at this point in his career, he had won 3 and was playing baseball. Kobe's 3 titles are not the same as Jordan's three titles. He wasn't even the best player on his team.
Also, more importantly, it runs deeper than numbers. Jordan would never, ever let a team come from 24 back to beat his team under any circumstances, much less at home in the Finals. It just would not have happened.
Also, more importantly, it runs deeper than numbers. Jordan would never, ever let a team come from 24 back to beat his team under any circumstances, much less at home in the Finals. It just would not have happened.
If he can pull off 3 straight he might be let back in the conversation. Wouldnt suprise me a bit to see him do but in those last 3 minutes of the game the Celtics had "the look in their eyes" that said this thing isnt even going back to Boston.
and that alone makes the MJ/Kobe conversation moot.. when Jordan was in the league, you knew who the best player in the league was.. EVERY YEAR. Kobe is the most skilled and most talented player in the league but not everybody thinks he is the best player and he certainly wasn't the "hands down" MVP this year (Chris Paul should've won it). You can make an argument for Chris Paul (the first 20 point 10 assist player in 15 years). You can make an argument for Lebron. He can score with Kobe, he shoots a higher FG% than Kobe, he's a way better teammate and leader than Kobe (as is Chris Paul), and he gets the best of Kobe when the Lakers play the Cavs. Kobe is more well-rounded but Lebron can make up for that with pure athletic ability and size. As it stands, the Cavs may take more games off Boston than the Lakers do. And this is only Kobe's first MVP because scoring titles don't make you the MVP of the league, especially not on 7th and 8th place teams that go out in the 1st round of the playoffs.
Optimus Prime 4 said:
How many years has Kobe been in the league? How many titlte did Jordan have that many seasons in?</p>
He shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath. Kobe has the tools to be Jordan. He has the athletic ability. Nothing else is similar.
The main difference is that Jordan became an icon. Kobe will never be an icon. Remember the "Jumping Man" logo, the "If I could be like Mike" gatorade commercials, the countless McDonalds ads. It will be a long time before we see another basketball player become the icon Jordan was because the NBA is in a completely different place than it was when Jordan was around. Shaq approached it in the late 90's, but he was still overshadowed by Jordan. Kobe had some endorsements, but then the whole Colorado thing happened. He is never going to be in Jordan's league. He shouldn't have to be though. He is still one of the 20 greatest players of all time.
Even if LeBron or Paul or whoever leads their team to multiple titles, they'll never reach Jordan status unless they become such a large part of pop culture the way Jordan did. Thats a huge part of his legacy that is never touched on in the Jordan vs. Kobe argument.
The main difference is that Jordan became an icon. Kobe will never be an icon. Remember the "Jumping Man" logo, the "If I could be like Mike" gatorade commercials, the countless McDonalds ads. It will be a long time before we see another basketball player become the icon Jordan was because the NBA is in a completely different place than it was when Jordan was around. Shaq approached it in the late 90's, but he was still overshadowed by Jordan. Kobe had some endorsements, but then the whole Colorado thing happened. He is never going to be in Jordan's league. He shouldn't have to be though. He is still one of the 20 greatest players of all time.
Even if LeBron or Paul or whoever leads their team to multiple titles, they'll never reach Jordan status unless they become such a large part of pop culture the way Jordan did. Thats a huge part of his legacy that is never touched on in the Jordan vs. Kobe argument.
i usually compare MJ's dominance with that of Tiger Woods. there was never a question...not once....that MJ was the best guy in the league. and that same thing has been going on for Tiger for a while now.
i just don't think people will look back in 25 years and talk about the Kobie era ....but they already do about MJ and they will about Tiger one day.
i just don't think people will look back in 25 years and talk about the Kobie era ....but they already do about MJ and they will about Tiger one day.
pippen > gasol, and the Lakers still need someone who can shoot from the outside consistently. That's one thing Jordan always had.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge MJ fan.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge MJ fan.
you can't tell me you'd pick lebron, duncan, or paul, or any other current nba player over kobe.
i can't stand the guy, but he is DAMN good. by far, the best player in the nba. the shots he takes (and makes) are ridiculous. you cannot guard him consistently. as for last night, even jordan had bad games (but he never had them in clutch time). lebron is the only player with a legit argument, but he has to learn to shoot. kobe is a damn assassin.
i can't stand the guy, but he is DAMN good. by far, the best player in the nba. the shots he takes (and makes) are ridiculous. you cannot guard him consistently. as for last night, even jordan had bad games (but he never had them in clutch time). lebron is the only player with a legit argument, but he has to learn to shoot. kobe is a damn assassin.
i'm a big federer fan, and he has been absolutely dominant. tiger has been too, and it's difficult to compare cross-sport. i'd have to go with federer though. he has made the finals of 20+ grand slams in a row (or something like that). that's absolutely ridiculous.</p>
Shaq>Pippen, and thats when Kobe won. He hasn't won this season's yet.
If we take Kobe's best team (the 2000 Laker's) and Jordan's best team (the 1996 Bull's) whose cast would you rather have:
Shaq, Robery Horry, A.C. Green, Glenn Rice, Ron Harper, Derek Fisher, and Rick Fox or
Pippen, Tony Kukoc, Rodman, Steve Kerr, Luc Longley, and Ron Harper (again)
I'd much rather have that Laker team.
If we take Kobe's best team (the 2000 Laker's) and Jordan's best team (the 1996 Bull's) whose cast would you rather have:
Shaq, Robery Horry, A.C. Green, Glenn Rice, Ron Harper, Derek Fisher, and Rick Fox or
Pippen, Tony Kukoc, Rodman, Steve Kerr, Luc Longley, and Ron Harper (again)
I'd much rather have that Laker team.
I hadn't read that, but I will say that if someone else were claiming that as a coincidence, I probably wouldn't believe them.
Edited to add that the fact that it's true makes it less of a coincidence.
Edited to add that the fact that it's true makes it less of a coincidence.
MJ made everyone on his team better. If he was having an off night shooting, he would have 12 assists and 10 rebs. Kobe is all about himself. He doesn't make people around him better, he just bitches at them. The dude is a total tool. All the great ones make the team better. Bird, Magic, MJ those are people that took good teams and made them great.
when Shaq was in his absolute prime, he was a monster. People like to think all he did was dunk but Shaq was the total package on offense (except for FT shooting).. he could use power but he also had a nice hook and a good drop step move and he was a willing passer. He could legitimately give you a 30-20 game anytime with 5 or so assists when the offense was running like it was supposed to. And you had to help off of him so Kobe got a lot of single coverage that MJ never saw in his career. Pippen was great but he ain't no Shaq. Shaq and Kobe should've won 5 titles at least if they could've gotten along.
When Shaq was the focus of the offense nobody could stop the Lakers. Kobe is great but is no MJ.
yeah okay. so can you please explain how in the eff is this team in the finals? granted this team is clearly very good, but the are very inexperienced. kobe will win at least one title in the next 3 years with this same team. celtics played easier opponents and had a much harder time getting to the finals. but all in all the celtics are better.
chris paul is very good. lebron is extremely overrated (thank you espn and the weaker eastern conference). tim duncan is maybe close to kobe but only because he has the rings. and there sure as hell is not a player living right now that i would rather take the last shot than kobe. he's gotta be one of the best 10 of all-time. no other active player is that good.
Lebron consistently shoots a better FG% than Kobe. Lebron isn't a great jumpshooter but Lebron is a winner. I'd take my chances with Lebron making the right play to win the game, whether it be going to the hole (since nobody including Kobe can stop Lebron from getting where he wants to go on the floor), getting to the line (not a great FT shooter but his % is around 80 in the last 2 minutes of the game), or making the correct pass to a teammate. I don't trust Kobe to do that. Kobe is more likely to launch an off-balance 20 foot jumper with guys in his face.. granted he can make that shot (and has), he has missed it more than he has made it and sometimes you gotta trust another guy to make the play. Jordan went to another level when he made the decision to trust his teammates. Kobe is getting better but he still goes to me-mode when the going gets tough.. he takes too many "hero shots" and when they're falling it's great but when they're not, you get what happened in the 04 Finals.</p>
garnett, pierce,or allen. never played in the finals. is it not obvious that when kobe was dishing the ball off to his "teammates" they were up by 20 points. in the fourth quarter, kobe took over and started playing for himself and they didnt have a chance. the only reason he is so great in the last quarter and scores so many points is because he takes 90% of his team's shots.
so I guess someone on their team is awesome. First, the Celtics are playing much better ball now. But a great team? Kobe has a good player in Gasol, and a decent player in Odom. Who else do they have? The Celtics have much better players.
The head-to-head lead he has over Federer is deceiving. Most of their matches have been on clay, and Nadal is the most dominant clay court player since at least Borg (and maybe ever). Federer is good enough on clay to usually make the finals against him. But Nadal rarely gets to a final on a hard court, so he rarely plays Federer on a hard court, where Federer has been by far the most dominant player since Sampras. The guy Federer (and Nadal) need to look out for is Novak Djokovic. He'll probably pass Nadal for #2 by the U.S. Open, and might take over #1 by the end of the year.
Although he did have mononeucleosis earlier this year, which is at least part of the reason he wasn't his usual dominant self during the Aussie Open and the spring hardcourt season. He made 4 finals during the clay court season (winning 1), which is about as good as he's done on clay since Nadal came on the scene. If it was just the mono earlier, then he may reestablish his dominance this summer. I don't think it was just the mono though. Djokovic was pushing him hard last summer and could have easily (and probably should have) taken the first two sets from him in last year's U.S. Open final.
and "most valuable" player. And before this series, everyone said the Lakers had the best team. Now, everyone says Boston just has better players. Truth is Boston has a better team and the Lakers have better individual players. Also, this is probably the year that the shine really starts to wear off Phil Jackson. He got his *** outcoached by Doc "everyone's favorite punching bag" Rivers in the last game.
While this is true, it's not entirely fair either. You can't completely dominate tennis for as long as you can golf. Also, I think Federer's decline has been overstated. Djokovic is a great player. Losing to him doesn't necessarily mean you've slipped, and I'm still confident Federer will dominate Wimbledon yet again this year.
Get unlimited access today.