ESPN Ranks Their All-time 74 Greatest Players
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
EZ-Ryder
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 11 Jul 2013
Posts: 688

PostPosted: Fri May 22, 2020 1:29 pm    Post subject:

ArminNBA wrote:
EZ-Ryder wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:
If these lists were honest, they wouldn't be presented as a "Rank of the All-Time Greatest Players," but rather as a "Rank of the All-Time Favorite Narratives."

It's quite clear that Jordan, Kobe, and LeBron are the greatest basketball PLAYERS of all time.

In my view, Jordan and Kobe are a tier ahead of LeBron in terms of sustained play as a complete basketball player.

LeBron, in my view, ultimately unlocked nearly every facet of the game, but he has never quite been the complete package all at once - whether it was being a subpar defender early in his career (and abandoning defense again during his Cavs stint) to being a subpar outside shooter until his latter career improvement as an outside shooter to his fairly consistent woes at the stripe. However, LeBron has almost always been utterly dominant and possessed incredible passing and at-rim scoring skills.

Kobe and Jordan possessed the complete package as basketball PLAYERS for a fairly long stretch - at-rim scoring to outside scoring (and everywhere in between), strong team and individual defense, all-time great footwork, excellent passing skills, elite rebounding guards (who could box out a big when needed), brilliant post play, supremely high basketball IQ, et al. And they were also dominant, which is an important compliment to owning the complete skill set.

But these lists aren't really about assessing basketball players in terms of "play," it's about narrative and likability and awards. It's why Duncan and Bird always end up ahead of Kobe on these lists despite not having a strong argument against him (unlike LeBron or KAJ or Magic who have legitimate cases to be made).


To be fair, this isn't a great take. You're clearly writing this with huge favoritism. Lebron isn't complete because he plays bad defense later in his career, but Kobe is complete because of superior footwork? Lebron was an inconsistent free throw shooter, but Kobe has a high basketball IQ? These comparisons for consistency make zero sense.


What? Let me try to decipher what you're saying. You believe I'm saying Kobe had a high basketball IQ and LeBron didn't? That's not what I said. I went on a longer rundown of Jordan and Kobe's skills, but it doesn't imply LeBron didn't own many of these skills.

For one, I was attempting to go for brevity - a true analysis of their game would requires many thousands of more words.

If you want me to expound a bit further, it's not that LeBron "isn't complete because he plays bad defense later in his career." In my view, LeBron did not own the complete package, all at the same time, for a prolonged period of time in his career. Let's run through some examples:

- 03-08: peak athleticism, dominant at-rim finish, elite passing, etc., but porous defense, poor midrange and 3pt game, no post game, unrefined post moves/footwork, etc.
- 09-14: athleticism still at peak level, dominant at-rim, elite passing, excellent team defender, improved 3pt and post game, etc., but still an unreliable to poor midrange shooter, improved post moves/footwork but few counters, etc.
- 15-20: athleticism dipped but still elite, great at-rim, elite passing, solid all-court shooter (from midrange to 3pt), etc., but mostly a terrible and unengaged defensive player (until this season)

I would argue LeBron has never been more of a complete package than *right now*, but of course, he isn't *as* dominant or athletic as he was in his peak (and is still an unreliable to poor FT shooter). Now, don't get me wrong, LeBron is still an unbelievable, 99th percentile athlete, but he's not the 07-12 LeBron anymore.

Back to Kobe. Because Kobe's skills were so refined at such a young age, he achieved the marriage of possessing the complete skills repertoire AND elite athleticism that I believe to be so rare in NBA history. In particular, Kobe's 2003 season was phenomenal from a basketball player standpoint. Forget awards/titles/narratives/etc. for a moment. Watch a full 2002-2003 Kobe Bryant game. This player was at the peak of his powers athletically and an all-court offensive player, able to do anything from elite back-to-the-basket post moves to 3pt shooting to dominant finishes at-rim with either hand and more, and he was a suffocating defensive player. And Kobe possessed this marriage (albeit with mild athletic declines) for a long stretch of time.


I didn't mean to call you out, I just didn't understand the comparisons, and I guess still don't.

You mentioned several times Lebron wasn't a good 3 point shooter for stretches of his career. Kobe was never a good 3 point shooter. In fact Lebron has a better 3 point percentage on his career and better individual season compared to Kobe. Kobe's best 3 point year he shot 38% compared to 41% for Lebron. Lebron's true shooting percentage is better, which incorporates 2's, 3's, and free throws. For all the flack Lebron gets as a defender, he and Kobe's defensive ratings are virtually identical. You call Kobe a great rebounding guard, Lebron is probably the second best rebounding SF ever after Larry Bird. Lebron has excellent footwork. Maybe not on Kobe or Jordan's level, but Lebron has been a magician at backing down players and finding creative ways to get to the basket since he came into the league. That definitely requires good footwork.

IMO neither guy has had a season as a complete player. They are both amazing at certain aspects and not amazing in others.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ArminNBA
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 20 Sep 2008
Posts: 1459

PostPosted: Fri May 22, 2020 3:14 pm    Post subject:

EZ-Ryder wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:
EZ-Ryder wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:
If these lists were honest, they wouldn't be presented as a "Rank of the All-Time Greatest Players," but rather as a "Rank of the All-Time Favorite Narratives."

It's quite clear that Jordan, Kobe, and LeBron are the greatest basketball PLAYERS of all time.

In my view, Jordan and Kobe are a tier ahead of LeBron in terms of sustained play as a complete basketball player.

LeBron, in my view, ultimately unlocked nearly every facet of the game, but he has never quite been the complete package all at once - whether it was being a subpar defender early in his career (and abandoning defense again during his Cavs stint) to being a subpar outside shooter until his latter career improvement as an outside shooter to his fairly consistent woes at the stripe. However, LeBron has almost always been utterly dominant and possessed incredible passing and at-rim scoring skills.

Kobe and Jordan possessed the complete package as basketball PLAYERS for a fairly long stretch - at-rim scoring to outside scoring (and everywhere in between), strong team and individual defense, all-time great footwork, excellent passing skills, elite rebounding guards (who could box out a big when needed), brilliant post play, supremely high basketball IQ, et al. And they were also dominant, which is an important compliment to owning the complete skill set.

But these lists aren't really about assessing basketball players in terms of "play," it's about narrative and likability and awards. It's why Duncan and Bird always end up ahead of Kobe on these lists despite not having a strong argument against him (unlike LeBron or KAJ or Magic who have legitimate cases to be made).


To be fair, this isn't a great take. You're clearly writing this with huge favoritism. Lebron isn't complete because he plays bad defense later in his career, but Kobe is complete because of superior footwork? Lebron was an inconsistent free throw shooter, but Kobe has a high basketball IQ? These comparisons for consistency make zero sense.


What? Let me try to decipher what you're saying. You believe I'm saying Kobe had a high basketball IQ and LeBron didn't? That's not what I said. I went on a longer rundown of Jordan and Kobe's skills, but it doesn't imply LeBron didn't own many of these skills.

For one, I was attempting to go for brevity - a true analysis of their game would requires many thousands of more words.

If you want me to expound a bit further, it's not that LeBron "isn't complete because he plays bad defense later in his career." In my view, LeBron did not own the complete package, all at the same time, for a prolonged period of time in his career. Let's run through some examples:

- 03-08: peak athleticism, dominant at-rim finish, elite passing, etc., but porous defense, poor midrange and 3pt game, no post game, unrefined post moves/footwork, etc.
- 09-14: athleticism still at peak level, dominant at-rim, elite passing, excellent team defender, improved 3pt and post game, etc., but still an unreliable to poor midrange shooter, improved post moves/footwork but few counters, etc.
- 15-20: athleticism dipped but still elite, great at-rim, elite passing, solid all-court shooter (from midrange to 3pt), etc., but mostly a terrible and unengaged defensive player (until this season)

I would argue LeBron has never been more of a complete package than *right now*, but of course, he isn't *as* dominant or athletic as he was in his peak (and is still an unreliable to poor FT shooter). Now, don't get me wrong, LeBron is still an unbelievable, 99th percentile athlete, but he's not the 07-12 LeBron anymore.

Back to Kobe. Because Kobe's skills were so refined at such a young age, he achieved the marriage of possessing the complete skills repertoire AND elite athleticism that I believe to be so rare in NBA history. In particular, Kobe's 2003 season was phenomenal from a basketball player standpoint. Forget awards/titles/narratives/etc. for a moment. Watch a full 2002-2003 Kobe Bryant game. This player was at the peak of his powers athletically and an all-court offensive player, able to do anything from elite back-to-the-basket post moves to 3pt shooting to dominant finishes at-rim with either hand and more, and he was a suffocating defensive player. And Kobe possessed this marriage (albeit with mild athletic declines) for a long stretch of time.


I didn't mean to call you out, I just didn't understand the comparisons, and I guess still don't.

You mentioned several times Lebron wasn't a good 3 point shooter for stretches of his career. Kobe was never a good 3 point shooter. In fact Lebron has a better 3 point percentage on his career and better individual season compared to Kobe. Kobe's best 3 point year he shot 38% compared to 41% for Lebron. Lebron's true shooting percentage is better, which incorporates 2's, 3's, and free throws. For all the flack Lebron gets as a defender, he and Kobe's defensive ratings are virtually identical. You call Kobe a great rebounding guard, Lebron is probably the second best rebounding SF ever after Larry Bird. Lebron has excellent footwork. Maybe not on Kobe or Jordan's level, but Lebron has been a magician at backing down players and finding creative ways to get to the basket since he came into the league. That definitely requires good footwork.

IMO neither guy has had a season as a complete player. They are both amazing at certain aspects and not amazing in others.


In my view, Kobe Bryant was the total package between 02-09, from the full offensive/defensive package to athleticism to dominance.

And again, you keep implying that I said LeBron was bad at certain things when I never did (like rebounding, when did I ever call LeBron a bad rebounder?).

To address your main concerns on my shooting observations:

1) Kobe was a good 3pt shooter, especially in his prime. Kobe shot 35% between 02 and 09, which was league average (and over 1PPA, an important efficiency indicator). But, remember, I'm talking skill. With contextualization, you would know that Kobe did a variety of things, a) take late-in-the-clock shots at a high rate, b) take many heat-check shots, c) take full-court to half-court heaves (a dying attempt type, as admitted by some superstars due to the desire to protect 3PT%). Now, we can certainly discuss whether Kobe was the most scrupulous with his shot attempts. But he had the range. While Kobe was certainly never an elite 3pt shooter by percentage, he was efficient and consistent enough. An illustrative theme throughout Kobe's career that supports his strength as a 3pt shooter is the attention that defenses paid towards him - you would see Kobe get doubled and sometimes tripled out beyond the three. Why is that? Kobe was a good 3pt shooter and defenses knew they had to play him tight to avoid 3pt scores. Other superstars who weren't strong at 3pt shooting would often face sagging defenses. Kobe never did. Also, in regards to LeBron's three shooting, I literally said he improved his 3pt shot to become a good 3pt shooter, so I'm not at all disputing that he became a fine 3pt shooter.

2) LeBron's true shooting percentage being better is not illustrative of superior all-around offensive skills, just because it incorporates 2pt, 3pt and FT shooting. It's about *how* you get those points when we talk all-court skills/repertoire/all-around game. DeAndre Jordan has a higher TS% than LeBron James. Does that mean he has the all-around skills? No, this is why contextualization is crucial. The best stat I ever saw in this regard is Kirk Goldsberry's Spread% and Range% based on data from 06-11. Spread% indicates the diversity of shot selection and Kobe was outstanding in this area by attempting shots in more shot cells than any other player (over 80% of total shot cells). LeBron was actually second to Kobe in diverse shot selection. However, Range% indicates the percentage of cells where a player scores over 1PPA (aka efficiently). Kobe was third overall in Range% (nearly 30%) and LeBron wasn't in the top 10 (below 25%, although I couldn't find the exact number). LeBron famously dominates at-rim and in other sweet spots, but until later in his career, he wasn't a consistent or reliable shooter in the midrange.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
SuperboyReformed
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 Oct 2012
Posts: 4014

PostPosted: Fri May 22, 2020 5:33 pm    Post subject:

ArminNBA wrote:
EZ-Ryder wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:
EZ-Ryder wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:
If these lists were honest, they wouldn't be presented as a "Rank of the All-Time Greatest Players," but rather as a "Rank of the All-Time Favorite Narratives."

It's quite clear that Jordan, Kobe, and LeBron are the greatest basketball PLAYERS of all time.

In my view, Jordan and Kobe are a tier ahead of LeBron in terms of sustained play as a complete basketball player.

LeBron, in my view, ultimately unlocked nearly every facet of the game, but he has never quite been the complete package all at once - whether it was being a subpar defender early in his career (and abandoning defense again during his Cavs stint) to being a subpar outside shooter until his latter career improvement as an outside shooter to his fairly consistent woes at the stripe. However, LeBron has almost always been utterly dominant and possessed incredible passing and at-rim scoring skills.

Kobe and Jordan possessed the complete package as basketball PLAYERS for a fairly long stretch - at-rim scoring to outside scoring (and everywhere in between), strong team and individual defense, all-time great footwork, excellent passing skills, elite rebounding guards (who could box out a big when needed), brilliant post play, supremely high basketball IQ, et al. And they were also dominant, which is an important compliment to owning the complete skill set.

But these lists aren't really about assessing basketball players in terms of "play," it's about narrative and likability and awards. It's why Duncan and Bird always end up ahead of Kobe on these lists despite not having a strong argument against him (unlike LeBron or KAJ or Magic who have legitimate cases to be made).


To be fair, this isn't a great take. You're clearly writing this with huge favoritism. Lebron isn't complete because he plays bad defense later in his career, but Kobe is complete because of superior footwork? Lebron was an inconsistent free throw shooter, but Kobe has a high basketball IQ? These comparisons for consistency make zero sense.


What? Let me try to decipher what you're saying. You believe I'm saying Kobe had a high basketball IQ and LeBron didn't? That's not what I said. I went on a longer rundown of Jordan and Kobe's skills, but it doesn't imply LeBron didn't own many of these skills.

For one, I was attempting to go for brevity - a true analysis of their game would requires many thousands of more words.

If you want me to expound a bit further, it's not that LeBron "isn't complete because he plays bad defense later in his career." In my view, LeBron did not own the complete package, all at the same time, for a prolonged period of time in his career. Let's run through some examples:

- 03-08: peak athleticism, dominant at-rim finish, elite passing, etc., but porous defense, poor midrange and 3pt game, no post game, unrefined post moves/footwork, etc.
- 09-14: athleticism still at peak level, dominant at-rim, elite passing, excellent team defender, improved 3pt and post game, etc., but still an unreliable to poor midrange shooter, improved post moves/footwork but few counters, etc.
- 15-20: athleticism dipped but still elite, great at-rim, elite passing, solid all-court shooter (from midrange to 3pt), etc., but mostly a terrible and unengaged defensive player (until this season)

I would argue LeBron has never been more of a complete package than *right now*, but of course, he isn't *as* dominant or athletic as he was in his peak (and is still an unreliable to poor FT shooter). Now, don't get me wrong, LeBron is still an unbelievable, 99th percentile athlete, but he's not the 07-12 LeBron anymore.

Back to Kobe. Because Kobe's skills were so refined at such a young age, he achieved the marriage of possessing the complete skills repertoire AND elite athleticism that I believe to be so rare in NBA history. In particular, Kobe's 2003 season was phenomenal from a basketball player standpoint. Forget awards/titles/narratives/etc. for a moment. Watch a full 2002-2003 Kobe Bryant game. This player was at the peak of his powers athletically and an all-court offensive player, able to do anything from elite back-to-the-basket post moves to 3pt shooting to dominant finishes at-rim with either hand and more, and he was a suffocating defensive player. And Kobe possessed this marriage (albeit with mild athletic declines) for a long stretch of time.


I didn't mean to call you out, I just didn't understand the comparisons, and I guess still don't.

You mentioned several times Lebron wasn't a good 3 point shooter for stretches of his career. Kobe was never a good 3 point shooter. In fact Lebron has a better 3 point percentage on his career and better individual season compared to Kobe. Kobe's best 3 point year he shot 38% compared to 41% for Lebron. Lebron's true shooting percentage is better, which incorporates 2's, 3's, and free throws. For all the flack Lebron gets as a defender, he and Kobe's defensive ratings are virtually identical. You call Kobe a great rebounding guard, Lebron is probably the second best rebounding SF ever after Larry Bird. Lebron has excellent footwork. Maybe not on Kobe or Jordan's level, but Lebron has been a magician at backing down players and finding creative ways to get to the basket since he came into the league. That definitely requires good footwork.

IMO neither guy has had a season as a complete player. They are both amazing at certain aspects and not amazing in others.


In my view, Kobe Bryant was the total package between 02-09, from the full offensive/defensive package to athleticism to dominance.

And again, you keep implying that I said LeBron was bad at certain things when I never did (like rebounding, when did I ever call LeBron a bad rebounder?).

To address your main concerns on my shooting observations:

1) Kobe was a good 3pt shooter, especially in his prime. Kobe shot 35% between 02 and 09, which was league average (and over 1PPA, an important efficiency indicator). But, remember, I'm talking skill. With contextualization, you would know that Kobe did a variety of things, a) take late-in-the-clock shots at a high rate, b) take many heat-check shots, c) take full-court to half-court heaves (a dying attempt type, as admitted by some superstars due to the desire to protect 3PT%). Now, we can certainly discuss whether Kobe was the most scrupulous with his shot attempts. But he had the range. While Kobe was certainly never an elite 3pt shooter by percentage, he was efficient and consistent enough. An illustrative theme throughout Kobe's career that supports his strength as a 3pt shooter is the attention that defenses paid towards him - you would see Kobe get doubled and sometimes tripled out beyond the three. Why is that? Kobe was a good 3pt shooter and defenses knew they had to play him tight to avoid 3pt scores. Other superstars who weren't strong at 3pt shooting would often face sagging defenses. Kobe never did. Also, in regards to LeBron's three shooting, I literally said he improved his 3pt shot to become a good 3pt shooter, so I'm not at all disputing that he became a fine 3pt shooter.

2) LeBron's true shooting percentage being better is not illustrative of superior all-around offensive skills, just because it incorporates 2pt, 3pt and FT shooting. It's about *how* you get those points when we talk all-court skills/repertoire/all-around game. DeAndre Jordan has a higher TS% than LeBron James. Does that mean he has the all-around skills? No, this is why contextualization is crucial. The best stat I ever saw in this regard is Kirk Goldsberry's Spread% and Range% based on data from 06-11. Spread% indicates the diversity of shot selection and Kobe was outstanding in this area by attempting shots in more shot cells than any other player (over 80% of total shot cells). LeBron was actually second to Kobe in diverse shot selection. However, Range% indicates the percentage of cells where a player scores over 1PPA (aka efficiently). Kobe was third overall in Range% (nearly 30%) and LeBron wasn't in the top 10 (below 25%, although I couldn't find the exact number). LeBron famously dominates at-rim and in other sweet spots, but until later in his career, he wasn't a consistent or reliable shooter in the midrange.

Armin, you are totally correct. But people will constantly debate in lebron's favor simply due to statistics. So context will never play into it. When it comes to basketball skills and on court ability, kobe is better than lebron in just about every single category, for sure everything offense, and most of the other stuff people claim in lebron's favor including passing and rebounds. Basically, kobe is better at basketball in everything. You can go through these forums and see all the specific cases contextually in kobe's favor. there are no such things in lebron favor, people will spout some numbers and percentages. But don't even go there. That's an exercise where the people in lebron's favor will only be trying to win an argument, they are not talking about basketball. they are just scouring the internet for numbers that prove something in their favor. They have no intent, as you are doing there, to describe really what it is that makes someone a better basketball player. If you want, you can even find here somewhere where one of the main culprits(vlf, av, enushunter, etc) actually said they are just trying to win the argument, and they are like the best at winning arguments...something like that, i dont know the wording they used.

but as i always say, numbers and stats will not help this debate because its not a proper scientific experiment, which is the way to use numbers to reach a conclusion. so you need to debate another way, and the way you are doing is the right way....a description of basketball skills, and the details involved. so many people form their conclusions by looking up stats on the internet on players they haven't even watched play. Someone recently told me Kareem was a garbage player and couldn't win without Magic. And I said it sounds to me like you haven't even watched Kareem, and all you know about him is he has a lot of total points, a hook shot, and was magic's teammate. Same with lebron, most people who root for him haven't even watched him that much, especially before the lakers. I said here that you guys will be surprised at how klunky and average he is, and whenever i point it out, the excuse is he's old now and injured and wasn't like this before. WHich is not true, he was always like this, but you guys were watching hours and hours of lakers, and maybe a couple minutes of lebron all those years. He didn't magically get old on the Lakers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakersInFour
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 16 Apr 2001
Posts: 6605
Location: Central Valley, CA

PostPosted: Sat May 23, 2020 4:20 pm    Post subject:

Jordan
Kareem
Kobe
Lebron
Magic
Bird

After that it's a logjam ...

Russell
Shaq
Wilt
Olajuwon

I really hate putting Russell/Wilt in because they played in an era with so little competition. But it pushes Duncan out of the Top 10, so it serves my purpose.
_________________
"It’s like going to the Getty and standing in front of Van Gogh’s Irises while some schmuck next to you critiques individual brush strokes. Just shut up already. The more you talk, the more you embarrass yourself."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 12999

PostPosted: Sat May 23, 2020 8:58 pm    Post subject:

SuperboyReformed wrote:
shooting/scoring>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>anything else

skills related to scoring in these debates should be ranked far higher than anything else.


Why should they? The most dominant team and winner this league has ever seen (Russell) was not built around shooting/scoring. So how have you concluded that matters more than say defense and rebounding?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
SuperboyReformed
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 Oct 2012
Posts: 4014

PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2020 9:30 am    Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:
SuperboyReformed wrote:
shooting/scoring>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>anything else

skills related to scoring in these debates should be ranked far higher than anything else.


Why should they? The most dominant team and winner this league has ever seen (Russell) was not built around shooting/scoring. So how have you concluded that matters more than say defense and rebounding?

there are a couple of notable exceptions. maybe bill russell, although i think you are majorly discounting the other teammates and how much better they were than the other teams, plus a completely different time that nobody here can remember watching.
Another exception would be Magic. But not many others. And definitely nobody of the modern era does such an exception apply to.

There are some fundamental things about basketball that a lot of people try to ignore in these debates with complex, tortured arguments and weighted point systems. But no matter what, there is no way around a couple of very broad, and very true things about basketball:
-taller/longer is better
-scoring>>>>>>>>>>>>>anything else

You win by scoring. The best scorer is going to be the best player of the team. You can get more rebounds and lose, more assists and lose, fewer turnovers and lose....but more points always wins.

Also, again other than notable exceptions like Magic, the effort and dedication involved to be a great scorer in the NBA is muuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuccccchhh harder than to be a good re bounder or a person who gets a lot of assists (not necessarily a great passer lol).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 86586
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2020 9:45 am    Post subject:

Winning takes all of those things. You don’t just win by scoring. Because if you let the other team score, that doesn’t help. And if you give the other team more possessions off rebounds and turnovers.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
SuperboyReformed
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 Oct 2012
Posts: 4014

PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2020 12:33 pm    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
Winning takes all of those things. You don’t just win by scoring. Because if you let the other team score, that doesn’t help. And if you give the other team more possessions off rebounds and turnovers.

yea this logic may help you win arguments but its not at all the way basketball really is. nobody is letting anyone score. most of the "doesnt play D" comments people accuse the players of are so off base and the result of much more different things than someone not playing defense.

as for "winning" lol, thats also a nonsense thing to debate. like heart and wanting it more.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 86586
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2020 1:45 pm    Post subject:

SuperboyReformed wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
Winning takes all of those things. You don’t just win by scoring. Because if you let the other team score, that doesn’t help. And if you give the other team more possessions off rebounds and turnovers.

yea this logic may help you win arguments but its not at all the way basketball really is. nobody is letting anyone score. most of the "doesnt play D" comments people accuse the players of are so off base and the result of much more different things than someone not playing defense.

as for "winning" lol, thats also a nonsense thing to debate. like heart and wanting it more.


Well, having displayed a poor grasp of either the subject of basketball or debate, I understand your response.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 29380

PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2020 4:25 pm    Post subject:

SuperboyReformed wrote:

-scoring>>>>>>>>>>>>>anything else

You win by scoring. The best scorer is going to be the best player of the team.



According to your theory:

Byron Scott was a better player than Magic Johnson.
Kenyon Martin was a better player than Jason Kidd.
Maurice Lucas was a better player than Bill Walton.

I could keep going, but you get the point.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
KobeDunk
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 26778

PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2020 4:39 pm    Post subject:

No way Lebron is ahead of Kobe Magic and Kareem. He’s not even ahead of Duncan IMO
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Inspector Gadget
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Posts: 30434

PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2020 4:43 pm    Post subject:

amazed how much disrespect Wilt gets in modern GOAT rankings, I wasn’t around when he played but I know stories about him and he was a load.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Runway8
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Posts: 21235
Location: La Jolla, San Diego

PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2020 4:56 pm    Post subject:

Cousy at #41 is LOL!!!!

In an era where the fundamentals of shooting were actually stressed, Bob Cousy managed to be a below 40% career shooter. Not only that, his off hand was weak by those clips I see of him dribbling in circles with one hand. No such person could make the NBA today. So in that sense, he too, is a once in a lifetime player.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kwase
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 21 Mar 2008
Posts: 2569

PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2020 6:38 pm    Post subject:

KobeDunk wrote:
No way Lebron is ahead of Kobe Magic and Kareem. He’s not even ahead of Duncan IMO



http://www.espn.com/video/clip?id=29220102


Pippen says Kobe is just as good if not better than MJ. If you look at this objectively, and you don't just agree with what the media tells you, and you're over 40 and you've seen the greats play then you have to put lebron at #8 at the highest. This social-media generation that hands out participation trophies and rewards people for 2nd place really sucks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 29380

PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2020 7:43 pm    Post subject:

Runway8 wrote:
Cousy at #41 is LOL!!!!

In an era where the fundamentals of shooting were actually stressed, Bob Cousy managed to be a below 40% career shooter. Not only that, his off hand was weak by those clips I see of him dribbling in circles with one hand. No such person could make the NBA today. So in that sense, he too, is a once in a lifetime player.


I respect Cousy. He pretty much invented the point guard position. Led the league in assist 8 straight years, made 12 all-NBA teams, was an MVP, won six rings. Most of his career was in the '50s when the NBA was a much different place, but I give him his props for his place in NBA history. I have no trouble with him being ranked 41, although ranking guys from the 50s is very tough because it's so apples to oranges.

*Oh, and I wouldn't get worked up about his shooting percentage. In his day, the league leader in shooting percentage typically hit only 45% of his shots (and that was with no 3-pointers to drag percentages down). Cousy, believe it, or not, was once the 15th best shooter in the league with a FG percentage of 38.5%. Very different time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 86586
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2020 8:45 pm    Post subject:

When comparing across eras, you have to compare players relative to their own peers, not to those who came later. Of course progress happens. But there’s a reason Alexander the Great is still an all time great general. The guys who come before are the shoulders the next generation stands on. That’s why we recognize their greatness for their time.

That said, Eff Cousy
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 29380

PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2020 9:24 pm    Post subject:

Inspector Gadget wrote:
amazed how much disrespect Wilt gets in modern GOAT rankings, I wasn’t around when he played but I know stories about him and he was a load.


To me, you could put the top 10 or 12 guys in virtually any order and I would be fine with it. They're all great amazing players with tremendous careers. So I always find it funny how no matter what order you rank players, some people get outraged. But then I guess that's why fan is short for fanatic
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
nickuku
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 6730
Location: Orange County

PostPosted: Tue May 26, 2020 3:45 am    Post subject:

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

Thats my list.
_________________
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 29380

PostPosted: Tue May 26, 2020 4:59 pm    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
When comparing across eras, you have to compare players relative to their own peers, not to those who came later. Of course progress happens. But there’s a reason Alexander the Great is still an all time great general. The guys who come before are the shoulders the next generation stands on. That’s why we recognize their greatness for their time.

That said, Eff Cousy



That's exactly it. We look at 60 year old tapes of Cousy and it's nothing special compared to what players do today. But his style was revolutionary at the time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 86586
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Tue May 26, 2020 6:15 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
When comparing across eras, you have to compare players relative to their own peers, not to those who came later. Of course progress happens. But there’s a reason Alexander the Great is still an all time great general. The guys who come before are the shoulders the next generation stands on. That’s why we recognize their greatness for their time.

That said, Eff Cousy



That's exactly it. We look at 60 year old tapes of Cousy and it's nothing special compared to what players do today. But his style was revolutionary at the time.


It’s why I consider Mikan worthy of top ten. He was the first dominant superstar.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 29380

PostPosted: Tue May 26, 2020 6:29 pm    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
When comparing across eras, you have to compare players relative to their own peers, not to those who came later. Of course progress happens. But there’s a reason Alexander the Great is still an all time great general. The guys who come before are the shoulders the next generation stands on. That’s why we recognize their greatness for their time.

That said, Eff Cousy



That's exactly it. We look at 60 year old tapes of Cousy and it's nothing special compared to what players do today. But his style was revolutionary at the time.


It’s why I consider Mikan worthy of top ten. He was the first dominant superstar.


Mikan's a tough one. He was the first great player. But he only played 6 years, and his career ended in 1956 -- the true dark ages of the NBA. I wouldn't put him in the top 10 myself, but I put him in the top 20-30 out of respect.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
SuperboyReformed
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 Oct 2012
Posts: 4014

PostPosted: Tue May 26, 2020 6:38 pm    Post subject:

The biggest problem with all these debates is that almost nobody has watched a lot of minutes of playtime of the people they are debating.

Most people have not watched players from other teams even a fraction of what they see from the Lakers. A Laker fan might watch all 82 games, and zero games from other teams. And what they know comes from highlights.

Next, you can see a lot of things on youtube. But prior to 2005, there isn't really all that much content. A lot of people who debate have not seen a lot of full games of MJ, Kobe, Shaq, Hakeem, Bird, Magic, Kareem. Even hardcore Laker fans now have not seen almost anything from before 1987-88.

There is almost no good footage from before the 80s of the NBA. Unless you are rather old, you have not seen West, Russell, Wilt, Elgin, etc., and you have no idea about their style and skills and the environment they were playing in.

Yet people argue adamantly about their position. This is why I accuse those of just trying to win arguments. You can tell those that have watched.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 86586
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Tue May 26, 2020 6:51 pm    Post subject:

SuperboyReformed wrote:
The biggest problem with all these debates is that almost nobody has watched a lot of minutes of playtime of the people they are debating.

Most people have not watched players from other teams even a fraction of what they see from the Lakers. A Laker fan might watch all 82 games, and zero games from other teams. And what they know comes from highlights.

Next, you can see a lot of things on youtube. But prior to 2005, there isn't really all that much content. A lot of people who debate have not seen a lot of full games of MJ, Kobe, Shaq, Hakeem, Bird, Magic, Kareem. Even hardcore Laker fans now have not seen almost anything from before 1987-88.

There is almost no good footage from before the 80s of the NBA. Unless you are rather old, you have not seen West, Russell, Wilt, Elgin, etc., and you have no idea about their style and skills and the environment they were playing in.

Yet people argue adamantly about their position. This is why I accuse those of just trying to win arguments. You can tell those that have watched.


You can also tell those who don’t understand what they are watching, or that their argument is exactly what they are accusing others of...
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
SuperboyReformed
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 Oct 2012
Posts: 4014

PostPosted: Tue May 26, 2020 8:22 pm    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
SuperboyReformed wrote:
The biggest problem with all these debates is that almost nobody has watched a lot of minutes of playtime of the people they are debating.

Most people have not watched players from other teams even a fraction of what they see from the Lakers. A Laker fan might watch all 82 games, and zero games from other teams. And what they know comes from highlights.

Next, you can see a lot of things on youtube. But prior to 2005, there isn't really all that much content. A lot of people who debate have not seen a lot of full games of MJ, Kobe, Shaq, Hakeem, Bird, Magic, Kareem. Even hardcore Laker fans now have not seen almost anything from before 1987-88.

There is almost no good footage from before the 80s of the NBA. Unless you are rather old, you have not seen West, Russell, Wilt, Elgin, etc., and you have no idea about their style and skills and the environment they were playing in.

Yet people argue adamantly about their position. This is why I accuse those of just trying to win arguments. You can tell those that have watched.


You can also tell those who don’t understand what they are watching, or that their argument is exactly what they are accusing others of...

what is your problem
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 29380

PostPosted: Tue May 26, 2020 8:29 pm    Post subject:

SuperboyReformed wrote:

Yet people argue adamantly about their position. This is why I accuse those of just trying to win arguments. You can tell those that have watched.


Let's test you. Of the people taking part in their thread, who do you think has seen Kareem, Hakeem, Magic, Bird, Shaq, MJ and who hasn't?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 4 of 5
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB