First Official Angergeneral top 10 GOAT..

[LookAway]

1. Michael Jordan
2. Bill Russell
3. Wilt
4. Kareem
5. Magic
6. Bird
7. Hakeem
8. Kobe
9. Shaq
10. Duncan

Just a question, but what is your criteria for putting Russell second. Either rings matter or they don't. If Russel is that great because of rings than Jordan has to be second. If rings are secondary then Shaq, Magic or Kareem should be 1st. No way Kobe is behind Bird.

You can't use one specific criteria across the board. Each player has to be analyzed according to their skill level, production level and accolades in their respective eras. With that being said, Jordan was the best player, a complete player, and greatest winner of his era.

Wilt was much better than Russell. But Russell won way more. his teams won mostly because of him, not because they were stacked like ppl try to say.

If not then it's just who is your favorite. Winning has to be the criteria because that is why they play imo

[LookAway]

Kobe beat Duncan once in the playoffs without Shaq. He lost to them twice WITH Shaq.

So I guess Shaq was the weak link

[Y2K]

Just a question, but what is your criteria for putting Russell second. Either rings matter or they don't. If Russel is that great because of rings than Jordan has to be second. If rings are secondary then Shaq, Magic or Kareem should be 1st. No way Kobe is behind Bird.

You can't use one specific criteria across the board. Each player has to be analyzed according to their skill level, production level and accolades in their respective eras. With that being said, Jordan was the best player, a complete player, and greatest winner of his era.

Wilt was much better than Russell. But Russell won way more. his teams won mostly because of him, not because they were stacked like ppl try to say.

If not then it's just who is your favorite. Winning has to be the criteria because that is why they play imo

So you just decided to ignore everything that I said after my first statement.

[Robceltsfan]

Lax defense? When did the no-handchecking rule come into effect? Isn't that what people complain about with today's players, how much easier it is to score with the lax defensive rules?

And extra possessions in the league huh? Yeah, I agree with that. Despite that fact Bird has still averaged less shot attempts per game in his career than Kobe has. Bird could have averaged plenty more points if he wanted to chuck the ball 9 out of 10 games, but he was too busy getting his teammates involved. Bird has a usage percentage FIVE POINTS lower than Kobe during his career and Bird still has stats that stack up to and in some cases surpass Kobe. Kobe has always been ball-dominant and that's why he's lead the Lakers in assists so often (despite never averaging more than 6.0 in any season). There's no need for a PG when Kobe brings the ball up and plays ISO basketball. zzzzz

So while you make a rebuttal of "you mean to tell me a forward has more rebounds that a sg playing out of position his entire career?" to illustrate how ho-hum that fact is, I'd ask you why a SF (that was not the primary ball handler) was able to rack up a higher assist rate than Kobe over his career? And no, the pace of play argument does not fly because the difference in pace isn't large enough to push Kobe's stat higher than Bird's here.

Bird shot from 2 at a higher percentage. Bird shot from 3 at a higher percentage. Bird shot FTs at a higher percentage. Bird was a better rebounder. Bird was a better passer. Bird was a less-athletic-but-more-gifted scorer than Kobe is. And Bird was a more clutch player than Kobe. That one will be tough for you to swallow, but the truth usually is.

Hope you enjoyed lunch.

"Lax defense? When did the no-handchecking rule come into effect?"

yes the 80s was a decade of lax defensive focus. didnt you watch during the era? hand check is for lazy or physical defenders but hand checking does not make for sound defense. it's a crutch.

"And extra possessions in the league huh? Yeah, I agree with that"

you have no choice, its a fact.

"Despite that fact Bird has still averaged less shot attempts per game in his career than Kobe has. Bird could have averaged plenty more points if he wanted to chuck the ball 9 out of 10 games, but he was too busy getting his teammates involved."

yes he averaged less shots but that's birds problem? whether he could averaged more points or not makes no difference because the point is he didnt. you get no credit for what you could have done. if he wanted to shoot more he could have and probably would have won less. bird was a great player but i'm sorry he's not better than kobe because you wish it to be so. again kobe was busy getting his teammates involved.. by leading five championship teams in assists. MORE THAN BIRD.

that's kobe getting more teammates involved for almost double the rings with vastly different rosters. repeating with both incarnations of the lakers. how many times did bird repeat again? ol' zeke managed to.

"Bird has a usage percentage..." "Kobe has always been ball-dominant and that's why he's lead the Lakers in assists so often (despite never averaging more than 6.0 in any season)."

you're actually getting worse than witling. just stop. yes kobe was ball dominant and he has almost double the rings to show for said ball dominance. what is the problem? lol. what does averaging more than 6 apg bring one? what did it do for john stockton or mark jackson? weakness.

"So while you make a rebuttal of "you mean to tell me a forward has more rebounds that a sg playing out of position his entire career?" to illustrate how ho-hum that fact is, I'd ask you why a SF (that was not the primary ball handler) was able to rack up a higher assist rate than Kobe over his career? And no, the pace of play argument does not fly because the difference in pace isn't large enough to push Kobe's stat higher than Bird's here."

again, what difference does it make that a forward that played in an era with more possessions and a faster pace has more rebounds than a GUARD... that mainly played point? why does this seem like a compelling point to you? it's grasping for straws.

"Bird shot from 2 at a higher percentage. Bird shot from 3 at a higher percentage. Bird shot FTs at a higher percentage. Bird was a better rebounder. Bird was a better passer. Bird was a less-athletic-but-more-gifted scorer than Kobe is. And Bird was a more clutch player than Kobe. That one will be tough for you to swallow, but the truth usually is."

yes, he shot better from two. he should, he's a forward that also shot less. yes bird shot a higher 3pt%.. of course it's easy to maintain that precious percentage when you shoot half as many threes' in your career when compared to a shooter like kobe. it's a 4% difference on top of that.. i wouldnt have even brought that up since it points to kobe being a better 3pt shooter anyways. much like in the case with jordan.. kobe has almost made as many threes as bird attempted.

bird was a less athletic, less gifted scorer that was pretty slick and was not a pussy like lebron at least. kobe was better than bird at scoring in every facet and we havent mentioned the defensive side of the ball where bird AGAIN has no argument against kobe.

how is bird more clutch than kobe? no one has more game winners and no one has won in more ways than kobe in the modern game. especially bird who is under the dream all time. too bad bird didnt play world class defense.

lunch was alright but cold by the time i got back to it.[/quote]


again, what difference does it make that a forward that played in an era with more possessions and a faster pace has more rebounds than a GUARD... that mainly played point? why does this seem like a compelling point to you? it's grasping for straws.

OK, let's put this pace of play thing to rest. I'm all about pointing out the difference in pace of play from the 60's to the early 2000's. The difference was huge. But from the late 80's to the early 2000's, the difference wasn't quite as large. In the 01-02 season the Lakers had a pace of play of 92.1 while the 85-86 Celtics 98.6. That's a 7% difference in pace of play. Kobe's usage % that year was 30.4% while Bird's was 27.6%, a 10% difference. So Kobe's ball dominance more than makes up for the difference in pace of play.

I know you're all about Kobe "leading championship teams in assists", but the bottom line is that those Laker squads never had a true ball handling point guard and therefore never had anyone with decent assist totals playing for them. For you to say that Kobe involved his teammates more than Bird did isn't even wrong......it's ludicrous, and the stats back that up. Bird was able to garner more assists while not being the primary ball handler and still score just as effectively as Kobe.

how is bird more clutch than kobe? no one has more game winners and no one has won in more ways than kobe in the modern game. especially bird who is under the dream all time. too bad bird didnt play world class defense.

Laker fans keep grasping at this falsehood of Kobe being the clutchest player of all-time. Simply put, it isn't true. He may have the most game winners of all-time, but if he does, that's only because he likely has at least TWICE as many game winning attempts as any other player in history. It's just another meaningless volume stat that Kobe's superior longevity and selfishness has garnered. And for you to say Bird wasn't an amazing defensive player is also short-sighted. True, he wasn't athletic and wasn't going to be a lock-down perimeter defender. But did you know that Bird led the NBA in defensive win shares FOUR times? Kobe never did that even once. I place Kobe in the Derek Jeter category of defensive player........grossly overrated. Bird averaged more steals during his career. Bird has more defensive win shares than Kobe despite playing almost 350 less games. Bird has a better career defensive rating (101 versus 105 for Kobe), despite playing in a slightly faster paced era. Bird's defense was underrated, Kobe's overrated. I'd give Kobe the slight edge defensively because he's simply more athletic. But the difference is not that great.

[Y2K]

Lax defense? When did the no-handchecking rule come into effect? Isn't that what people complain about with today's players, how much easier it is to score with the lax defensive rules?

And extra possessions in the league huh? Yeah, I agree with that. Despite that fact Bird has still averaged less shot attempts per game in his career than Kobe has. Bird could have averaged plenty more points if he wanted to chuck the ball 9 out of 10 games, but he was too busy getting his teammates involved. Bird has a usage percentage FIVE POINTS lower than Kobe during his career and Bird still has stats that stack up to and in some cases surpass Kobe. Kobe has always been ball-dominant and that's why he's lead the Lakers in assists so often (despite never averaging more than 6.0 in any season). There's no need for a PG when Kobe brings the ball up and plays ISO basketball. zzzzz

So while you make a rebuttal of "you mean to tell me a forward has more rebounds that a sg playing out of position his entire career?" to illustrate how ho-hum that fact is, I'd ask you why a SF (that was not the primary ball handler) was able to rack up a higher assist rate than Kobe over his career? And no, the pace of play argument does not fly because the difference in pace isn't large enough to push Kobe's stat higher than Bird's here.

Bird shot from 2 at a higher percentage. Bird shot from 3 at a higher percentage. Bird shot FTs at a higher percentage. Bird was a better rebounder. Bird was a better passer. Bird was a less-athletic-but-more-gifted scorer than Kobe is. And Bird was a more clutch player than Kobe. That one will be tough for you to swallow, but the truth usually is.

Hope you enjoyed lunch.

"Lax defense? When did the no-handchecking rule come into effect?"

yes the 80s was a decade of lax defensive focus. didnt you watch during the era? hand check is for lazy or physical defenders but hand checking does not make for sound defense. it's a crutch.

"And extra possessions in the league huh? Yeah, I agree with that"

you have no choice, its a fact.

"Despite that fact Bird has still averaged less shot attempts per game in his career than Kobe has. Bird could have averaged plenty more points if he wanted to chuck the ball 9 out of 10 games, but he was too busy getting his teammates involved."

yes he averaged less shots but that's birds problem? whether he could averaged more points or not makes no difference because the point is he didnt. you get no credit for what you could have done. if he wanted to shoot more he could have and probably would have won less. bird was a great player but i'm sorry he's not better than kobe because you wish it to be so. again kobe was busy getting his teammates involved.. by leading five championship teams in assists. MORE THAN BIRD.

that's kobe getting more teammates involved for almost double the rings with vastly different rosters. repeating with both incarnations of the lakers. how many times did bird repeat again? ol' zeke managed to.

"Bird has a usage percentage..." "Kobe has always been ball-dominant and that's why he's lead the Lakers in assists so often (despite never averaging more than 6.0 in any season)."

you're actually getting worse than witling. just stop. yes kobe was ball dominant and he has almost double the rings to show for said ball dominance. what is the problem? lol. what does averaging more than 6 apg bring one? what did it do for john stockton or mark jackson? weakness.

"So while you make a rebuttal of "you mean to tell me a forward has more rebounds that a sg playing out of position his entire career?" to illustrate how ho-hum that fact is, I'd ask you why a SF (that was not the primary ball handler) was able to rack up a higher assist rate than Kobe over his career? And no, the pace of play argument does not fly because the difference in pace isn't large enough to push Kobe's stat higher than Bird's here."

again, what difference does it make that a forward that played in an era with more possessions and a faster pace has more rebounds than a GUARD... that mainly played point? why does this seem like a compelling point to you? it's grasping for straws.

"Bird shot from 2 at a higher percentage. Bird shot from 3 at a higher percentage. Bird shot FTs at a higher percentage. Bird was a better rebounder. Bird was a better passer. Bird was a less-athletic-but-more-gifted scorer than Kobe is. And Bird was a more clutch player than Kobe. That one will be tough for you to swallow, but the truth usually is."

yes, he shot better from two. he should, he's a forward that also shot less. yes bird shot a higher 3pt%.. of course it's easy to maintain that precious percentage when you shoot half as many threes' in your career when compared to a shooter like kobe. it's a 4% difference on top of that.. i wouldnt have even brought that up since it points to kobe being a better 3pt shooter anyways. much like in the case with jordan.. kobe has almost made as many threes as bird attempted.

bird was a less athletic, less gifted scorer that was pretty slick and was not a pussy like lebron at least. kobe was better than bird at scoring in every facet and we havent mentioned the defensive side of the ball where bird AGAIN has no argument against kobe.

how is bird more clutch than kobe? no one has more game winners and no one has won in more ways than kobe in the modern game. especially bird who is under the dream all time. too bad bird didnt play world class defense.

lunch was alright but cold by the time i got back to it.

again, what difference does it make that a forward that played in an era with more possessions and a faster pace has more rebounds than a GUARD... that mainly played point? why does this seem like a compelling point to you? it's grasping for straws.

OK, let's put this pace of play thing to rest. I'm all about pointing out the difference in pace of play from the 60's to the early 2000's. The difference was huge. But from the late 80's to the early 2000's, the difference wasn't quite as large. In the 01-02 season the Lakers had a pace of play of 92.1 while the 85-86 Celtics 98.6. That's a 7% difference in pace of play. Kobe's usage % that year was 30.4% while Bird's was 27.6%, a 10% difference. So Kobe's ball dominance more than makes up for the difference in pace of play.

I know you're all about Kobe "leading championship teams in assists", but the bottom line is that those Laker squads never had a true ball handling point guard and therefore never had anyone with decent assist totals playing for them. For you to say that Kobe involved his teammates more than Bird did isn't even wrong......it's ludicrous, and the stats back that up. Bird was able to garner more assists while not being the primary ball handler and still score just as effectively as Kobe.

how is bird more clutch than kobe? no one has more game winners and no one has won in more ways than kobe in the modern game. especially bird who is under the dream all time. too bad bird didnt play world class defense.

Laker fans keep grasping at this falsehood of Kobe being the clutchest player of all-time. Simply put, it isn't true. He may have the most game winners of all-time, but if he does, that's only because he likely has at least TWICE as many game winning attempts as any other player in history. It's just another meaningless volume stat that Kobe's superior longevity and selfishness has garnered. And for you to say Bird wasn't an amazing defensive player is also short-sighted. True, he wasn't athletic and wasn't going to be a lock-down perimeter defender. But did you know that Bird led the NBA in defensive win shares FOUR times? Kobe never did that even once. I place Kobe in the Derek Jeter category of defensive player........grossly overrated. Bird averaged more steals during his career. Bird has more defensive win shares than Kobe despite playing almost 350 less games. Bird has a better career defensive rating (101 versus 105 for Kobe), despite playing in a slightly faster paced era. Bird's defense was underrated, Kobe's overrated. I'd give Kobe the slight edge defensively because he's simply more athletic. But the difference is not that great.[/quote]

When has a back court player ever led the league in defensive win shares?

[Robceltsfan]

Lax defense? When did the no-handchecking rule come into effect? Isn't that what people complain about with today's players, how much easier it is to score with the lax defensive rules?

And extra possessions in the league huh? Yeah, I agree with that. Despite that fact Bird has still averaged less shot attempts per game in his career than Kobe has. Bird could have averaged plenty more points if he wanted to chuck the ball 9 out of 10 games, but he was too busy getting his teammates involved. Bird has a usage percentage FIVE POINTS lower than Kobe during his career and Bird still has stats that stack up to and in some cases surpass Kobe. Kobe has always been ball-dominant and that's why he's lead the Lakers in assists so often (despite never averaging more than 6.0 in any season). There's no need for a PG when Kobe brings the ball up and plays ISO basketball. zzzzz

So while you make a rebuttal of "you mean to tell me a forward has more rebounds that a sg playing out of position his entire career?" to illustrate how ho-hum that fact is, I'd ask you why a SF (that was not the primary ball handler) was able to rack up a higher assist rate than Kobe over his career? And no, the pace of play argument does not fly because the difference in pace isn't large enough to push Kobe's stat higher than Bird's here.

Bird shot from 2 at a higher percentage. Bird shot from 3 at a higher percentage. Bird shot FTs at a higher percentage. Bird was a better rebounder. Bird was a better passer. Bird was a less-athletic-but-more-gifted scorer than Kobe is. And Bird was a more clutch player than Kobe. That one will be tough for you to swallow, but the truth usually is.

Hope you enjoyed lunch.

"Lax defense? When did the no-handchecking rule come into effect?"

yes the 80s was a decade of lax defensive focus. didnt you watch during the era? hand check is for lazy or physical defenders but hand checking does not make for sound defense. it's a crutch.

"And extra possessions in the league huh? Yeah, I agree with that"

you have no choice, its a fact.

"Despite that fact Bird has still averaged less shot attempts per game in his career than Kobe has. Bird could have averaged plenty more points if he wanted to chuck the ball 9 out of 10 games, but he was too busy getting his teammates involved."

yes he averaged less shots but that's birds problem? whether he could averaged more points or not makes no difference because the point is he didnt. you get no credit for what you could have done. if he wanted to shoot more he could have and probably would have won less. bird was a great player but i'm sorry he's not better than kobe because you wish it to be so. again kobe was busy getting his teammates involved.. by leading five championship teams in assists. MORE THAN BIRD.

that's kobe getting more teammates involved for almost double the rings with vastly different rosters. repeating with both incarnations of the lakers. how many times did bird repeat again? ol' zeke managed to.

"Bird has a usage percentage..." "Kobe has always been ball-dominant and that's why he's lead the Lakers in assists so often (despite never averaging more than 6.0 in any season)."

you're actually getting worse than witling. just stop. yes kobe was ball dominant and he has almost double the rings to show for said ball dominance. what is the problem? lol. what does averaging more than 6 apg bring one? what did it do for john stockton or mark jackson? weakness.

"So while you make a rebuttal of "you mean to tell me a forward has more rebounds that a sg playing out of position his entire career?" to illustrate how ho-hum that fact is, I'd ask you why a SF (that was not the primary ball handler) was able to rack up a higher assist rate than Kobe over his career? And no, the pace of play argument does not fly because the difference in pace isn't large enough to push Kobe's stat higher than Bird's here."

again, what difference does it make that a forward that played in an era with more possessions and a faster pace has more rebounds than a GUARD... that mainly played point? why does this seem like a compelling point to you? it's grasping for straws.

"Bird shot from 2 at a higher percentage. Bird shot from 3 at a higher percentage. Bird shot FTs at a higher percentage. Bird was a better rebounder. Bird was a better passer. Bird was a less-athletic-but-more-gifted scorer than Kobe is. And Bird was a more clutch player than Kobe. That one will be tough for you to swallow, but the truth usually is."

yes, he shot better from two. he should, he's a forward that also shot less. yes bird shot a higher 3pt%.. of course it's easy to maintain that precious percentage when you shoot half as many threes' in your career when compared to a shooter like kobe. it's a 4% difference on top of that.. i wouldnt have even brought that up since it points to kobe being a better 3pt shooter anyways. much like in the case with jordan.. kobe has almost made as many threes as bird attempted.

bird was a less athletic, less gifted scorer that was pretty slick and was not a pussy like lebron at least. kobe was better than bird at scoring in every facet and we havent mentioned the defensive side of the ball where bird AGAIN has no argument against kobe.

how is bird more clutch than kobe? no one has more game winners and no one has won in more ways than kobe in the modern game. especially bird who is under the dream all time. too bad bird didnt play world class defense.

lunch was alright but cold by the time i got back to it.

again, what difference does it make that a forward that played in an era with more possessions and a faster pace has more rebounds than a GUARD... that mainly played point? why does this seem like a compelling point to you? it's grasping for straws.

OK, let's put this pace of play thing to rest. I'm all about pointing out the difference in pace of play from the 60's to the early 2000's. The difference was huge. But from the late 80's to the early 2000's, the difference wasn't quite as large. In the 01-02 season the Lakers had a pace of play of 92.1 while the 85-86 Celtics 98.6. That's a 7% difference in pace of play. Kobe's usage % that year was 30.4% while Bird's was 27.6%, a 10% difference. So Kobe's ball dominance more than makes up for the difference in pace of play.

I know you're all about Kobe "leading championship teams in assists", but the bottom line is that those Laker squads never had a true ball handling point guard and therefore never had anyone with decent assist totals playing for them. For you to say that Kobe involved his teammates more than Bird did isn't even wrong......it's ludicrous, and the stats back that up. Bird was able to garner more assists while not being the primary ball handler and still score just as effectively as Kobe.

how is bird more clutch than kobe? no one has more game winners and no one has won in more ways than kobe in the modern game. especially bird who is under the dream all time. too bad bird didnt play world class defense.

Laker fans keep grasping at this falsehood of Kobe being the clutchest player of all-time. Simply put, it isn't true. He may have the most game winners of all-time, but if he does, that's only because he likely has at least TWICE as many game winning attempts as any other player in history. It's just another meaningless volume stat that Kobe's superior longevity and selfishness has garnered. And for you to say Bird wasn't an amazing defensive player is also short-sighted. True, he wasn't athletic and wasn't going to be a lock-down perimeter defender. But did you know that Bird led the NBA in defensive win shares FOUR times? Kobe never did that even once. I place Kobe in the Derek Jeter category of defensive player........grossly overrated. Bird averaged more steals during his career. Bird has more defensive win shares than Kobe despite playing almost 350 less games. Bird has a better career defensive rating (101 versus 105 for Kobe), despite playing in a slightly faster paced era. Bird's defense was underrated, Kobe's overrated. I'd give Kobe the slight edge defensively because he's simply more athletic. But the difference is not that great.

When has a back court player ever led the league in defensive win shares?[/quote]


Paul George......last year. And he's leading the league this year too. Kobe Bryant has never even graced the top 10 in any season.

[Deez]

Jeepers, what are people still arguing about on here? Kobe is not the most clutch, Kobe did not carry Shaq to any titles, MJ is GOAT, Bird is better than Kobe at rebounding, steals. Kobe is a better scorer.

[Y2K]

"Lax defense? When did the no-handchecking rule come into effect?"

yes the 80s was a decade of lax defensive focus. didnt you watch during the era? hand check is for lazy or physical defenders but hand checking does not make for sound defense. it's a crutch.

"And extra possessions in the league huh? Yeah, I agree with that"

you have no choice, its a fact.

"Despite that fact Bird has still averaged less shot attempts per game in his career than Kobe has. Bird could have averaged plenty more points if he wanted to chuck the ball 9 out of 10 games, but he was too busy getting his teammates involved."

yes he averaged less shots but that's birds problem? whether he could averaged more points or not makes no difference because the point is he didnt. you get no credit for what you could have done. if he wanted to shoot more he could have and probably would have won less. bird was a great player but i'm sorry he's not better than kobe because you wish it to be so. again kobe was busy getting his teammates involved.. by leading five championship teams in assists. MORE THAN BIRD.

that's kobe getting more teammates involved for almost double the rings with vastly different rosters. repeating with both incarnations of the lakers. how many times did bird repeat again? ol' zeke managed to.

"Bird has a usage percentage..." "Kobe has always been ball-dominant and that's why he's lead the Lakers in assists so often (despite never averaging more than 6.0 in any season)."

you're actually getting worse than witling. just stop. yes kobe was ball dominant and he has almost double the rings to show for said ball dominance. what is the problem? lol. what does averaging more than 6 apg bring one? what did it do for john stockton or mark jackson? weakness.

"So while you make a rebuttal of "you mean to tell me a forward has more rebounds that a sg playing out of position his entire career?" to illustrate how ho-hum that fact is, I'd ask you why a SF (that was not the primary ball handler) was able to rack up a higher assist rate than Kobe over his career? And no, the pace of play argument does not fly because the difference in pace isn't large enough to push Kobe's stat higher than Bird's here."

again, what difference does it make that a forward that played in an era with more possessions and a faster pace has more rebounds than a GUARD... that mainly played point? why does this seem like a compelling point to you? it's grasping for straws.

"Bird shot from 2 at a higher percentage. Bird shot from 3 at a higher percentage. Bird shot FTs at a higher percentage. Bird was a better rebounder. Bird was a better passer. Bird was a less-athletic-but-more-gifted scorer than Kobe is. And Bird was a more clutch player than Kobe. That one will be tough for you to swallow, but the truth usually is."

yes, he shot better from two. he should, he's a forward that also shot less. yes bird shot a higher 3pt%.. of course it's easy to maintain that precious percentage when you shoot half as many threes' in your career when compared to a shooter like kobe. it's a 4% difference on top of that.. i wouldnt have even brought that up since it points to kobe being a better 3pt shooter anyways. much like in the case with jordan.. kobe has almost made as many threes as bird attempted.

bird was a less athletic, less gifted scorer that was pretty slick and was not a pussy like lebron at least. kobe was better than bird at scoring in every facet and we havent mentioned the defensive side of the ball where bird AGAIN has no argument against kobe.

how is bird more clutch than kobe? no one has more game winners and no one has won in more ways than kobe in the modern game. especially bird who is under the dream all time. too bad bird didnt play world class defense.

lunch was alright but cold by the time i got back to it.

again, what difference does it make that a forward that played in an era with more possessions and a faster pace has more rebounds than a GUARD... that mainly played point? why does this seem like a compelling point to you? it's grasping for straws.

OK, let's put this pace of play thing to rest. I'm all about pointing out the difference in pace of play from the 60's to the early 2000's. The difference was huge. But from the late 80's to the early 2000's, the difference wasn't quite as large. In the 01-02 season the Lakers had a pace of play of 92.1 while the 85-86 Celtics 98.6. That's a 7% difference in pace of play. Kobe's usage % that year was 30.4% while Bird's was 27.6%, a 10% difference. So Kobe's ball dominance more than makes up for the difference in pace of play.

I know you're all about Kobe "leading championship teams in assists", but the bottom line is that those Laker squads never had a true ball handling point guard and therefore never had anyone with decent assist totals playing for them. For you to say that Kobe involved his teammates more than Bird did isn't even wrong......it's ludicrous, and the stats back that up. Bird was able to garner more assists while not being the primary ball handler and still score just as effectively as Kobe.

how is bird more clutch than kobe? no one has more game winners and no one has won in more ways than kobe in the modern game. especially bird who is under the dream all time. too bad bird didnt play world class defense.

Laker fans keep grasping at this falsehood of Kobe being the clutchest player of all-time. Simply put, it isn't true. He may have the most game winners of all-time, but if he does, that's only because he likely has at least TWICE as many game winning attempts as any other player in history. It's just another meaningless volume stat that Kobe's superior longevity and selfishness has garnered. And for you to say Bird wasn't an amazing defensive player is also short-sighted. True, he wasn't athletic and wasn't going to be a lock-down perimeter defender. But did you know that Bird led the NBA in defensive win shares FOUR times? Kobe never did that even once. I place Kobe in the Derek Jeter category of defensive player........grossly overrated. Bird averaged more steals during his career. Bird has more defensive win shares than Kobe despite playing almost 350 less games. Bird has a better career defensive rating (101 versus 105 for Kobe), despite playing in a slightly faster paced era. Bird's defense was underrated, Kobe's overrated. I'd give Kobe the slight edge defensively because he's simply more athletic. But the difference is not that great.

When has a back court player ever led the league in defensive win shares?

Paul George......last year. And he's leading the league this year too. Kobe Bryant has never even graced the top 10 in any season.[/quote]
PG is not a back court player. He's a SF, a front court player. But DWS is so Deeply flawed. It favors bigs and does not illustrate whatsoever how Good or bad a player actually defends.

[Ali Natural]

Town Bidness got his shit pushed in this thread. Good job wrangling in that wild Kobe Kid


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Robceltsfan]

again, what difference does it make that a forward that played in an era with more possessions and a faster pace has more rebounds than a GUARD... that mainly played point? why does this seem like a compelling point to you? it's grasping for straws.

OK, let's put this pace of play thing to rest. I'm all about pointing out the difference in pace of play from the 60's to the early 2000's. The difference was huge. But from the late 80's to the early 2000's, the difference wasn't quite as large. In the 01-02 season the Lakers had a pace of play of 92.1 while the 85-86 Celtics 98.6. That's a 7% difference in pace of play. Kobe's usage % that year was 30.4% while Bird's was 27.6%, a 10% difference. So Kobe's ball dominance more than makes up for the difference in pace of play.

I know you're all about Kobe "leading championship teams in assists", but the bottom line is that those Laker squads never had a true ball handling point guard and therefore never had anyone with decent assist totals playing for them. For you to say that Kobe involved his teammates more than Bird did isn't even wrong......it's ludicrous, and the stats back that up. Bird was able to garner more assists while not being the primary ball handler and still score just as effectively as Kobe.

how is bird more clutch than kobe? no one has more game winners and no one has won in more ways than kobe in the modern game. especially bird who is under the dream all time. too bad bird didnt play world class defense.

Laker fans keep grasping at this falsehood of Kobe being the clutchest player of all-time. Simply put, it isn't true. He may have the most game winners of all-time, but if he does, that's only because he likely has at least TWICE as many game winning attempts as any other player in history. It's just another meaningless volume stat that Kobe's superior longevity and selfishness has garnered. And for you to say Bird wasn't an amazing defensive player is also short-sighted. True, he wasn't athletic and wasn't going to be a lock-down perimeter defender. But did you know that Bird led the NBA in defensive win shares FOUR times? Kobe never did that even once. I place Kobe in the Derek Jeter category of defensive player........grossly overrated. Bird averaged more steals during his career. Bird has more defensive win shares than Kobe despite playing almost 350 less games. Bird has a better career defensive rating (101 versus 105 for Kobe), despite playing in a slightly faster paced era. Bird's defense was underrated, Kobe's overrated. I'd give Kobe the slight edge defensively because he's simply more athletic. But the difference is not that great.

When has a back court player ever led the league in defensive win shares?

Paul George......last year. And he's leading the league this year too. Kobe Bryant has never even graced the top 10 in any season.

PG is not a back court player. He's a SF, a front court player. But DWS is so Deeply flawed. It favors bigs and does not illustrate whatsoever how Good or bad a player actually defends.[/quote]

The interior is where the majority of the scoring occurs, or where the majority of scoring plays originate. It makes sense that the larger gentlemen would have a greater effect on the defensive end. Defensive rating is similar in this regard and that's another place Kobe has never graced the top 10 in any season. I'd be happy to concede the use of DWS and DRat if we were comparing a C to a SG, but I'm comparing a SG against a SF that spent most of his time on the perimeter. In reality not much of a difference between the two. I stated earlier that Kobe was a better lock-down defender than Bird, but 1 on 1 defense is not the only part of the game by any means. The same goes for 1 on 1 offense. Kobe Bryant may be the best 1 on 1 player ever (that's for a different thread to debate), but NBA basketball is not a 1 on 1 sport. Kobe Bryant was an above average defender during the middle part of his career, but has been a defensive liability for many, many years now.

[town bidness]

again, what difference does it make that a forward that played in an era with more possessions and a faster pace has more rebounds than a GUARD... that mainly played point? why does this seem like a compelling point to you? it's grasping for straws.

OK, let's put this pace of play thing to rest. I'm all about pointing out the difference in pace of play from the 60's to the early 2000's. The difference was huge. But from the late 80's to the early 2000's, the difference wasn't quite as large. In the 01-02 season the Lakers had a pace of play of 92.1 while the 85-86 Celtics 98.6. That's a 7% difference in pace of play. Kobe's usage % that year was 30.4% while Bird's was 27.6%, a 10% difference. So Kobe's ball dominance more than makes up for the difference in pace of play.

I know you're all about Kobe "leading championship teams in assists", but the bottom line is that those Laker squads never had a true ball handling point guard and therefore never had anyone with decent assist totals playing for them. For you to say that Kobe involved his teammates more than Bird did isn't even wrong......it's ludicrous, and the stats back that up. Bird was able to garner more assists while not being the primary ball handler and still score just as effectively as Kobe.

how is bird more clutch than kobe? no one has more game winners and no one has won in more ways than kobe in the modern game. especially bird who is under the dream all time. too bad bird didnt play world class defense.

Laker fans keep grasping at this falsehood of Kobe being the clutchest player of all-time. Simply put, it isn't true. He may have the most game winners of all-time, but if he does, that's only because he likely has at least TWICE as many game winning attempts as any other player in history. It's just another meaningless volume stat that Kobe's superior longevity and selfishness has garnered. And for you to say Bird wasn't an amazing defensive player is also short-sighted. True, he wasn't athletic and wasn't going to be a lock-down perimeter defender. But did you know that Bird led the NBA in defensive win shares FOUR times? Kobe never did that even once. I place Kobe in the Derek Jeter category of defensive player........grossly overrated. Bird averaged more steals during his career. Bird has more defensive win shares than Kobe despite playing almost 350 less games. Bird has a better career defensive rating (101 versus 105 for Kobe), despite playing in a slightly faster paced era. Bird's defense was underrated, Kobe's overrated. I'd give Kobe the slight edge defensively because he's simply more athletic. But the difference is not that great.[/quote]







sorry, i forgot about this thread.

"Laker fans keep grasping at this falsehood of Kobe being the clutchest player of all-time."

it's just reality you cant accept because you must keep your delusion alive.

"Simply put, it isn't true. He may have the most game winners of all-time, but if he does, that's only because he likely has at least TWICE as many game winning attempts as any other player in history."

right..... just like how kareem is the greatest scorer of all time and you know what... he's taken the most shots of all time also. jordan is in third place as far as attempts go and imagine that.... he's third place all time points scored.

it's pretty simple how that works. if you do it the most you get the credit of being the best at it. here's a bit more of common sense for you, "more game winners = good". everyone on earth knows who is going to take the shot at the end and he's still made the most even though he took the most. how could he make more than other closers while taking less game winners genius? lol. another terrible argument. basically logic free nonsense.

"And for you to say Bird wasn't an amazing defensive player is also short-sighted."

LOL, i watched him and he was average at best to slightly below average. amazing defensive players can make more than 3 second all defensive teams and DEFINITELY more than ZERO first teams. this is just a completely superficial view of what you are comparing here... not even going in any real depth. unbelievable.

give me a fucking break. let me guess... dirk is a tremendous defender also in your myopic view of bball?

"But did you know that Bird led the NBA in defensive win shares FOUR times? Kobe never did that even once. I place Kobe in the Derek Jeter category of defensive player........grossly overrated. Bird averaged more steals during his career."

LOL, holy shit you are desperate. defensive win share four times eh? woooooooow.

steals? good for bird. i'm sure iverson was a defensive giant in your eyes.

good thing the coaches for the nba were not as terrible at simple analysis over the last 35 years. no one with a fulling function brain would say this. i actually fear for your mental well being.

kobe with all of his nine defensive first teams from coaches in the league and many years of stellar defense is 'grossly overrated' but bird and his defensive win share is solid proof in your eyes? mind you again that is in the purview of the simple minded, superficial bball fan.

"Bird has a better career defensive rating (101 versus 105 for Kobe), despite playing in a slightly faster paced era. Bird's defense was underrated, Kobe's overrated. I'd give Kobe the slight edge defensively because he's simply more athletic. But the difference is not that great."

LOL... holy shit.. all of that just to concede to reality in the most backhanded, intellectually dishonest and detached from reality sort of way that kobe is indeed the better defender because he is "more athletic". lol, either you have a character flaw of some sort or you must think low of me.

kobe is the more athletic player in every facet and kobe was the SMARTER player in every facet of the gave as evidenced by his PLAY and SUCCESS.

there is nothing you can do about it either. plus he didnt even need the greatest front line in history either, lol.

why did you focus so narrowly on this and dodge all of the other details in my post prior? you assertion about birds shooting, etc was stomped on.

[AbeVigodaLive]

kobe is the more athletic player in every facet and kobe was the SMARTER player in every facet of the gave as evidenced by his PLAY and SUCCESS.

This is why some debates just aren't worth it. When something like that is written, the author is screaming "I'M JUST FUCKING WITH YOU!"

I'm not saying Bird is smarter than Kobe. Or vice-versa. I'm saying claiming one was "smarter" than the other in every facet without any tangible proof or anecdotal proof is just lazy trolling.

And obviously, the author believes he's a better troll than that... otherwise he wouldn't have wasted so much time crafting such long responses. And he might be... but he can't let silly statements like that derail everything when it's so unnecessary.

[town bidness]

i forgot a a couple paragraphs you had in there on second look.

"OK, let's put this pace of play thing to rest. "

just accept that it's correct and move on. the rest of you post is refuted by facts. a faster pace.. is a faster pace. more possessions is more possessions regardless of how you want to downplay the degree. dont forget the lack of defensive focus especally when compared to now. just look at what terrible teams like the nuggets were scoring in the 80s. actually never mind. you already know you dont have a point.

"I know you're all about Kobe "leading championship teams in assists", but the bottom line is that those Laker squads never had a true ball handling point guard and therefore never had anyone with decent assist totals playing for them."

yes they did.. his name was kobe and he played pg and sg. he's very good at it as he has demonstrated many times. even if this wasnt the case.. so what?

" For you to say that Kobe involved his teammates more than Bird did isn't even wrong......it's ludicrous, and the stats back that up. Bird was able to garner more assists while not being the primary ball handler and still score just as effectively as Kobe."

no it's correct because kobe lead two completely different squads to the promised land leading every team in assists along the way. simply put.. he took more teammates from bums to champs than bird. how could you argue otherwise unless you are talking about some nba that solely exists in your mind.. bird had more assists because there were more possessions in that time along with a faster pace. look it up. too bad for bird those extra assist dont mean jack shit since he couldnt win more than three rings with such amazing assist output, lol.

[Deez]

i forgot a a couple paragraphs you had in there on second look.

"OK, let's put this pace of play thing to rest. "

just accept that it's correct and move on. the rest of you post is refuted by facts. a faster pace.. is a faster pace. more possessions is more possessions regardless of how you want to downplay the degree. dont forget the lack of defensive focus especally when compared to now. just look at what terrible teams like the nuggets were scoring in the 80s. actually never mind. you already know you dont have a point.

"I know you're all about Kobe "leading championship teams in assists", but the bottom line is that those Laker squads never had a true ball handling point guard and therefore never had anyone with decent assist totals playing for them."

yes they did.. his name was kobe and he played pg and sg. he's very good at it as he has demonstrated many times. even if this wasnt the case.. so what?

" For you to say that Kobe involved his teammates more than Bird did isn't even wrong......it's ludicrous, and the stats back that up. Bird was able to garner more assists while not being the primary ball handler and still score just as effectively as Kobe."

no it's correct because kobe lead two completely different squads to the promised land leading every team in assists along the way. simply put.. he took more teammates from bums to champs than bird. how could you argue otherwise unless you are talking about some nba that solely exists in your mind.. bird had more assists because there were more possessions in that time along with a faster pace. look it up. too bad for bird those extra assist dont mean jack shit since he couldnt win more than three rings with such amazing assist output, lol.

He lead 1 maybe 2 teams to the promise land but with major assistance from Gasol and Shaq carried him to the other 3 titles. Kobe lead 2 titles arguably.

[wailuaFC]

i forgot a a couple paragraphs you had in there on second look.

"OK, let's put this pace of play thing to rest. "

just accept that it's correct and move on. the rest of you post is refuted by facts. a faster pace.. is a faster pace. more possessions is more possessions regardless of how you want to downplay the degree. dont forget the lack of defensive focus especally when compared to now. just look at what terrible teams like the nuggets were scoring in the 80s. actually never mind. you already know you dont have a point.

"I know you're all about Kobe "leading championship teams in assists", but the bottom line is that those Laker squads never had a true ball handling point guard and therefore never had anyone with decent assist totals playing for them."

yes they did.. his name was kobe and he played pg and sg. he's very good at it as he has demonstrated many times. even if this wasnt the case.. so what?

" For you to say that Kobe involved his teammates more than Bird did isn't even wrong......it's ludicrous, and the stats back that up. Bird was able to garner more assists while not being the primary ball handler and still score just as effectively as Kobe."

no it's correct because kobe lead two completely different squads to the promised land leading every team in assists along the way. simply put.. he took more teammates from bums to champs than bird. how could you argue otherwise unless you are talking about some nba that solely exists in your mind.. bird had more assists because there were more possessions in that time along with a faster pace. look it up. too bad for bird those extra assist dont mean jack shit since he couldnt win more than three rings with such amazing assist output, lol.

He lead 1 maybe 2 teams to the promise land but with major assistance from Gasol and Shaq carried him to the other 3 titles. Kobe lead 2 titles arguably.

I really dont think it can be argued that kobe was the leader of the last two titles. Im not saying who posted better numbers in the finals, but kobe was absolutely the leader of those teams, and to suggest otherwise is silly

[town bidness]

kobe is the more athletic player in every facet and kobe was the SMARTER player in every facet of the gave as evidenced by his PLAY and SUCCESS.

This is why some debates just aren't worth it. When something like that is written, the author is screaming "I'M JUST FUCKING WITH YOU!"

I'm not saying Bird is smarter than Kobe. Or vice-versa. I'm saying claiming one was "smarter" than the other in every facet without any tangible proof or anecdotal proof is just lazy trolling.

And obviously, the author believes he's a better troll than that... otherwise he wouldn't have wasted so much time crafted such long responses...

"This is why some debates just aren't worth it. When something like that is written, the author is screaming "I'M JUST FUCKING WITH YOU!""

that is a reflection upon those that need to say such to themselves as a coping mechanism for having the truth shoved in their face.

that's not my problem, lol.

"I'm not saying Bird is smarter than Kobe. Or vice-versa."

of course you wouldnt... you have problems with that sort of thing.

"I" am unequivocally saying kobe is smarter than bird and you know what is compelling evidence? the player with the better play and better success. it doesnt require ones feelings and it's common sense. easy aint it?

"And obviously, the author believes he's a better troll than that... otherwise he wouldn't have wasted so much time crafted such long responses..."

i dont believe it i know it and you can use what ever euphemism you want for truth telling. again, it's a reflection upon you.

it's time spent on a message board so isnt it all wasted time? besides, it's a few paragraphs... if you find that taxing i dont know what to tell you.

replying line by line is me showing respect to the simp i happen to be browbeating at the time. i aim for precision and i like to make myself abundantly clear.

that is all.

[Deez]

i forgot a a couple paragraphs you had in there on second look.

"OK, let's put this pace of play thing to rest. "

just accept that it's correct and move on. the rest of you post is refuted by facts. a faster pace.. is a faster pace. more possessions is more possessions regardless of how you want to downplay the degree. dont forget the lack of defensive focus especally when compared to now. just look at what terrible teams like the nuggets were scoring in the 80s. actually never mind. you already know you dont have a point.

"I know you're all about Kobe "leading championship teams in assists", but the bottom line is that those Laker squads never had a true ball handling point guard and therefore never had anyone with decent assist totals playing for them."

yes they did.. his name was kobe and he played pg and sg. he's very good at it as he has demonstrated many times. even if this wasnt the case.. so what?

" For you to say that Kobe involved his teammates more than Bird did isn't even wrong......it's ludicrous, and the stats back that up. Bird was able to garner more assists while not being the primary ball handler and still score just as effectively as Kobe."

no it's correct because kobe lead two completely different squads to the promised land leading every team in assists along the way. simply put.. he took more teammates from bums to champs than bird. how could you argue otherwise unless you are talking about some nba that solely exists in your mind.. bird had more assists because there were more possessions in that time along with a faster pace. look it up. too bad for bird those extra assist dont mean jack shit since he couldnt win more than three rings with such amazing assist output, lol.

He lead 1 maybe 2 teams to the promise land but with major assistance from Gasol and Shaq carried him to the other 3 titles. Kobe lead 2 titles arguably.

I really dont think it can be argued that kobe was the leader of the last two titles. Im not saying who posted better numbers in the finals, but kobe was absolutely the leader of those teams, and to suggest otherwise is silly

Yeah I agree with the last 2 titles.

[town bidness]

i forgot a a couple paragraphs you had in there on second look.

"OK, let's put this pace of play thing to rest. "

just accept that it's correct and move on. the rest of you post is refuted by facts. a faster pace.. is a faster pace. more possessions is more possessions regardless of how you want to downplay the degree. dont forget the lack of defensive focus especally when compared to now. just look at what terrible teams like the nuggets were scoring in the 80s. actually never mind. you already know you dont have a point.

"I know you're all about Kobe "leading championship teams in assists", but the bottom line is that those Laker squads never had a true ball handling point guard and therefore never had anyone with decent assist totals playing for them."

yes they did.. his name was kobe and he played pg and sg. he's very good at it as he has demonstrated many times. even if this wasnt the case.. so what?

" For you to say that Kobe involved his teammates more than Bird did isn't even wrong......it's ludicrous, and the stats back that up. Bird was able to garner more assists while not being the primary ball handler and still score just as effectively as Kobe."

no it's correct because kobe lead two completely different squads to the promised land leading every team in assists along the way. simply put.. he took more teammates from bums to champs than bird. how could you argue otherwise unless you are talking about some nba that solely exists in your mind.. bird had more assists because there were more possessions in that time along with a faster pace. look it up. too bad for bird those extra assist dont mean jack shit since he couldnt win more than three rings with such amazing assist output, lol.

He lead 1 maybe 2 teams to the promise land but with major assistance from Gasol and Shaq carried him to the other 3 titles. Kobe lead 2 titles arguably.

you are not helping bob.

[town bidness]

He lead 1 maybe 2 teams to the promise land but with major assistance from Gasol and Shaq carried him to the other 3 titles. Kobe lead 2 titles arguably.

I really dont think it can be argued that kobe was the leader of the last two titles. Im not saying who posted better numbers in the finals, but kobe was absolutely the leader of those teams, and to suggest otherwise is silly

Yeah I agree with the last 2 titles.[/quote]

when you are either the top scorer or the #2 scorer all while being the main ball handler, the top defender and being the coldest closer ever... you've earned the title of leader by your WORKS.

shaq demonstrated exactly how he was a poor leader through out his career and his petty nature. i went through some of his history a few posts back. there is a clear pattern.

[Deez]

I really dont think it can be argued that kobe was the leader of the last two titles. Im not saying who posted better numbers in the finals, but kobe was absolutely the leader of those teams, and to suggest otherwise is silly

Yeah I agree with the last 2 titles.[/quote]

when you are either the top scorer or the #2 scorer all while being the main ball handler, the top defender and being the coldest closer ever... you've earned the title of leader by your WORKS.

shaq demonstrated exactly how he was a poor leader through out his career and his petty nature. i went through some of his history a few posts back. there is a clear pattern.

Kobe was the leader of the last 2 titles, I said that. Shaq was the leader of the 1st 3. Nobody can deny that. Kobe is cold when closing you are right.