Broussard: "Majority" of ex-players rank Kobe ahead of Lebron
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Snipes
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Posts: 5997

PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 10:50 pm    Post subject:

george w kush wrote:
Darth Los Angeles wrote:
george w kush wrote:
wolfpaclaker wrote:
I’ve actually been really impressed with Lebron at this stage in his career how great he is. Dudes been in the league since 2003 and is still when healthy a MVP.

However vs Kobe it’s always been the same for me

Lebron is the better more efficient offense player no arguing there. Only a biased homer would argue against Lebrons superiority in stats efficiency etc he’s just a better player than Kobe on a game to game basis when it comes down to offense

Here is why Kobe is the better player though imo

- Defense. Kobe in the Shaq era was one of the best defenders in the league. He was shutting down Iverson and TMac in their primes. When it comes to a single possession or down to the wire in a long series and rough physical game Kobe plays elite D. He coasted a lot late in his career but overall man defense I take Kobe.


- leadership. Kobe wills his team to win. No way Kobe allows the team to miss the playoffs or lose focus like this team did this season
- 5 rings vs 3

To me it’s still

Jordan
Kobe
Magic
Lebron

In that order

And if not for HIV it would have been Magic a top that list.



Kobe's defense during the Shaq era? He(unlike Carter/T-Mac) had the luxury of being able to expend more energy on defense due to him having a better player than him(Shaq) to dump the ball to for easy buckets. [b]Shaq was also a tremendous shot blocker during that time. It's easy to look good on easy when your job is to funnel players into your shot blocker.[/b]

And leadership? Publicly advocating to trade your teammates is leadership? Or how about snitching on your teammates? Crying to the media about management needing better players? Telling free agents they should come play with you so they can be his 'Tyson Chandler'?

He was very lucky to have been drafted by the Lakers, played with a prime Shaq early in his career and played for PJ. They also lucked out by getting Gasol for peanuts. Wonder if he would have those 3 rings if he had been drafted by the Cavs and played with Boozer and Mo Williams? Exactly. You could inserted Wade, Carter or T-Mac to play with a prime Shaq during those years and they would have won a ring. In fact we saw that scenario play out when Shaq won a ring with Wade.


3 finals MVP>2 finals MVP. And BTW he was dominant in all 3 of those rings. He didn't shoot 41% for a finals series and go 6/22 in a game 7 @ home like Kobe did.


I've been waiting for you to show yourself. Now you do it... You are just making stuff up and have no idea what you are talking about.


Shaq = 3 time All defense player during the Lakers title run, but yeah let's pretend like his elite rim protecting ability didn't matter.

Whoever Kobe was guarding, they run into Shaq.

Whoever T-Mac was guarding, they run into Steven Hunter.

It's alot easier to put more effort into defense when you have another guy carrying your team into the playoffs and finals year after year as opposed to carrying the offense by yourself.


Kobe's record during the 3-peat ERA when Shaq was out = 12-11

Shaq's record during the 3-peat ERA when Kobe was out = 25-7


If people want to debate Kobe vs Lebron, people need to acknowledge Kobe early in his career played with an elite HOF center and elite coach, while Lebron played with Carlos Boozer and Larry Hughes and even carried those bums to the finals, where as Kobe without Shaq wouldn't even make the playoffs.


And people need to acknowledge that in his prime, Lebron teamed up with 2 HOFers and at that time BOTH top 5 players in the league. ALONG with a bunch of premiere veterans for $1.2mill to FINALLY win a ring.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682

PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 10:53 pm    Post subject:

I have not been the most active member since this team started losing, but is "george w kush" a sarcastic poster, troll, or am I just missing something? Either way, I like his username, though
_________________
(bleep) David Stern.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:01 pm    Post subject:

george w kush wrote:
wolfpaclaker wrote:
I’ve actually been really impressed with Lebron at this stage in his career how great he is. Dudes been in the league since 2003 and is still when healthy a MVP.

However vs Kobe it’s always been the same for me

Lebron is the better more efficient offense player no arguing there. Only a biased homer would argue against Lebrons superiority in stats efficiency etc he’s just a better player than Kobe on a game to game basis when it comes down to offense

Here is why Kobe is the better player though imo

- Defense. Kobe in the Shaq era was one of the best defenders in the league. He was shutting down Iverson and TMac in their primes. When it comes to a single possession or down to the wire in a long series and rough physical game Kobe plays elite D. He coasted a lot late in his career but overall man defense I take Kobe.


- leadership. Kobe wills his team to win. No way Kobe allows the team to miss the playoffs or lose focus like this team did this season
- 5 rings vs 3

To me it’s still

Jordan
Kobe
Magic
Lebron

In that order

And if not for HIV it would have been Magic a top that list.



Kobe's defense during the Shaq era? He(unlike Carter/T-Mac) had the luxury of being able to expend more energy on defense due to him having a better player than him(Shaq) to dump the ball to for easy buckets. Shaq was also a tremendous shot blocker during that time. It's easy to look good on easy when your job is to funnel players into your shot blocker.

And leadership? Publicly advocating to trade your teammates is leadership? Or how about snitching on your teammates? Crying to the media about management needing better players? Telling free agents they should come play with you so they can be his 'Tyson Chandler'?

He was very lucky to have been drafted by the Lakers, played with a prime Shaq early in his career and played for PJ. They also lucked out by getting Gasol for peanuts. Wonder if he would have those 3 rings if he had been drafted by the Cavs and played with Boozer and Mo Williams? Exactly. You could inserted Wade, Carter or T-Mac to play with a prime Shaq during those years and they would have won a ring. In fact we saw that scenario play out when Shaq won a ring with Wade.


3 finals MVP>2 finals MVP. And BTW he was dominant in all 3 of those rings. He didn't shoot 41% for a finals series and go 6/22 in a game 7 @ home like Kobe did.


Eh.

1. Kobe was a great defensive player at his best; anyone who argues otherwise just looks like an idiot.

2. Every GOAT-level player is lucky with the quality of his teammates. Kobe, Shaq, Lebron, MJ, Russell, on and on -- none of these guys has anything to complain about on that score. I'd love to see someone make a meaningful analysis of the quality of the teammates of GOAT level guy, but I never have. It's always on the level of "My guy had it tougher than your guy."

3. Leadership is a dead end topic. People always think the guy they like was a better leader than the guy they don't like.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682

PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:10 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
george w kush wrote:
wolfpaclaker wrote:
I’ve actually been really impressed with Lebron at this stage in his career how great he is. Dudes been in the league since 2003 and is still when healthy a MVP.

However vs Kobe it’s always been the same for me

Lebron is the better more efficient offense player no arguing there. Only a biased homer would argue against Lebrons superiority in stats efficiency etc he’s just a better player than Kobe on a game to game basis when it comes down to offense

Here is why Kobe is the better player though imo

- Defense. Kobe in the Shaq era was one of the best defenders in the league. He was shutting down Iverson and TMac in their primes. When it comes to a single possession or down to the wire in a long series and rough physical game Kobe plays elite D. He coasted a lot late in his career but overall man defense I take Kobe.


- leadership. Kobe wills his team to win. No way Kobe allows the team to miss the playoffs or lose focus like this team did this season
- 5 rings vs 3

To me it’s still

Jordan
Kobe
Magic
Lebron

In that order

And if not for HIV it would have been Magic a top that list.



Kobe's defense during the Shaq era? He(unlike Carter/T-Mac) had the luxury of being able to expend more energy on defense due to him having a better player than him(Shaq) to dump the ball to for easy buckets. Shaq was also a tremendous shot blocker during that time. It's easy to look good on easy when your job is to funnel players into your shot blocker.

And leadership? Publicly advocating to trade your teammates is leadership? Or how about snitching on your teammates? Crying to the media about management needing better players? Telling free agents they should come play with you so they can be his 'Tyson Chandler'?

He was very lucky to have been drafted by the Lakers, played with a prime Shaq early in his career and played for PJ. They also lucked out by getting Gasol for peanuts. Wonder if he would have those 3 rings if he had been drafted by the Cavs and played with Boozer and Mo Williams? Exactly. You could inserted Wade, Carter or T-Mac to play with a prime Shaq during those years and they would have won a ring. In fact we saw that scenario play out when Shaq won a ring with Wade.


3 finals MVP>2 finals MVP. And BTW he was dominant in all 3 of those rings. He didn't shoot 41% for a finals series and go 6/22 in a game 7 @ home like Kobe did.


Eh.

1. Kobe was a great defensive player at his best; anyone who argues otherwise just looks like an idiot.

2. Every GOAT-level player is lucky with the quality of his teammates. Kobe, Shaq, Lebron, MJ, Russell, on and on -- none of these guys has anything to complain about on that score. I'd love to see someone make a meaningful analysis of the quality of the teammates of GOAT level guy, but I never have. It's always on the level of "My guy had it tougher than your guy."

3. Leadership is a dead end topic. People always think the guy they like was a better leader than the guy they don't like.


Regarding #2, I think this is a very overlooked point. And I think this actually favors Kobe a lot. I think you also have to consider the conference difficulty (or difficulty of opponents faced) when judging the success of your team as it pertains to the quality of teammates available. The offense run is also important. For example, the 2009 Cavs on the surface, were a bad team that LeBron gets a lot of praise for carrying. However for that team's offense (similar to the 2001 76'ers offense), that set of teammates was actually quite optimal.
_________________
(bleep) David Stern.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Darth Los Angeles
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 06 Dec 2011
Posts: 2181

PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:16 pm    Post subject:

george w kush wrote:
Darth Los Angeles wrote:
george w kush wrote:
wolfpaclaker wrote:
I’ve actually been really impressed with Lebron at this stage in his career how great he is. Dudes been in the league since 2003 and is still when healthy a MVP.

However vs Kobe it’s always been the same for me

Lebron is the better more efficient offense player no arguing there. Only a biased homer would argue against Lebrons superiority in stats efficiency etc he’s just a better player than Kobe on a game to game basis when it comes down to offense

Here is why Kobe is the better player though imo

- Defense. Kobe in the Shaq era was one of the best defenders in the league. He was shutting down Iverson and TMac in their primes. When it comes to a single possession or down to the wire in a long series and rough physical game Kobe plays elite D. He coasted a lot late in his career but overall man defense I take Kobe.


- leadership. Kobe wills his team to win. No way Kobe allows the team to miss the playoffs or lose focus like this team did this season
- 5 rings vs 3

To me it’s still

Jordan
Kobe
Magic
Lebron

In that order

And if not for HIV it would have been Magic a top that list.



Kobe's defense during the Shaq era? He(unlike Carter/T-Mac) had the luxury of being able to expend more energy on defense due to him having a better player than him(Shaq) to dump the ball to for easy buckets. [b]Shaq was also a tremendous shot blocker during that time. It's easy to look good on easy when your job is to funnel players into your shot blocker.[/b]

And leadership? Publicly advocating to trade your teammates is leadership? Or how about snitching on your teammates? Crying to the media about management needing better players? Telling free agents they should come play with you so they can be his 'Tyson Chandler'?

He was very lucky to have been drafted by the Lakers, played with a prime Shaq early in his career and played for PJ. They also lucked out by getting Gasol for peanuts. Wonder if he would have those 3 rings if he had been drafted by the Cavs and played with Boozer and Mo Williams? Exactly. You could inserted Wade, Carter or T-Mac to play with a prime Shaq during those years and they would have won a ring. In fact we saw that scenario play out when Shaq won a ring with Wade.


3 finals MVP>2 finals MVP. And BTW he was dominant in all 3 of those rings. He didn't shoot 41% for a finals series and go 6/22 in a game 7 @ home like Kobe did.


I've been waiting for you to show yourself. Now you do it... You are just making stuff up and have no idea what you are talking about.


Shaq = 3 time All defense player during the Lakers title run, but yeah let's pretend like his elite rim protecting ability didn't matter.

Whoever Kobe was guarding, they run into Shaq.

Whoever T-Mac was guarding, they run into Steven Hunter.

It's alot easier to put more effort into defense when you have another guy carrying your team into the playoffs and finals year after year as opposed to carrying the offense by yourself.


Kobe's record during the 3-peat ERA when Shaq was out = 12-11

Shaq's record during the 3-peat ERA when Kobe was out = 25-7


If people want to debate Kobe vs Lebron, people need to acknowledge Kobe early in his career played with an elite HOF center and elite coach, while Lebron played with Carlos Boozer and Larry Hughes and even carried those bums to the finals, where as Kobe without Shaq wouldn't even make the playoffs.


Goodness man...

You're just making stuff up and throwing around few names with some pointless statistics.

You have an argument going here that says Kobe is a lesser player because whomever he was guarding was funneled to Shaq?

Did you even watch the Lakers back then? Because that DEFINITELY was NOT the game plan. And if you know anything about that era, you'd know that Shaq wasn't playing any type of man defense whether it was primary or even a rotation.

Shaq wouldn't even show on pick n roll/pop. And the game plan was to ALWAYS force to the baseline, not Shaq.

Stop making up stupid crap to support your stupid arguments.
_________________
“There are no limits. There are plateaus, but you must not stay there, you must go beyond them. If it kills you, it kills you. A man must constantly exceed his level.” ―Bruce Lee
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:31 pm    Post subject:

bfc1125roy wrote:
activeverb wrote:
bfc1125roy wrote:
I was talking purely about individual skill. When it comes to contributions to winning games, that is a different topic and will need a different breakdown.


I am confused here.

First, you said you believe that scoring and one-on-one defense are more important skills than rebounding and passing because they impacted the game more.

Now, you're say that scoring and one-on-one defense don't necessarily contribute more to winning than rebounding and passing.

Which raises the question: If scoring and one-on-one defense don't contribute more to winning, what exactly is the important "impact" you think they have on the game?


My bad, I did not phrase my post clearly.

I believe scoring and one vs. one defense are the most important skills because they have a more direct impact on the game. The goal of a basketball game is to score more points than your opponent. The two most obvious ways to do that are to score the ball and prevent your opponent (person you are guarding) from scoring the ball. With passing and rebounding, while they can impact the score significantly, there is usually a level or two of indirection there (e.g. if you make a good pass, someone else can make a pass, which then gives someone an open layup).

activeverb wrote:

Now, you're say that scoring and one-on-one defense don't necessarily contribute more to winning than rebounding and passing.


I am referring not to which of a player's individual skills contribute to winning games, but rather I was referring to Kobe and LeBron's overall contributions to winning games, That topic is more nuanced. For example, Magic Johnson, though he was neither an elite scorer nor an elite defender, was just such a good passer (and pretty good rebounder) that he made a huge contribution to his team winning games. So in order to asses each player's *absolute* contribution to their teams winning, you need more context than just Player A is a better scorer therefore he helps his team win more than Player B. That requires you to understand the offensive and defensive schemes each player was running, and how each player functioned within that specific context.

Hopefully I was more clear there.


You're clear, but you're not very persuasive to me.

You basically state that scoring and one-on-one defense are more important in affecting the score because you think they are more important, but you don't give any evidence why that is so.

And then you keeping saying over and over and over how this topic is so nuanced, yet you never go into the nuances in a meaningful way.

My take based on what you have said so far: Your viewpoint is pretty simplistic (you just really like Kobe's style of play) but for some reason you want people to think your viewpoint is so complex that it can't be explained.

Anyway, unless you're able to elevate the conversation, I think I'll move on.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:39 pm    Post subject:

bfc1125roy wrote:
activeverb wrote:

2. Every GOAT-level player is lucky with the quality of his teammates. Kobe, Shaq, Lebron, MJ, Russell, on and on -- none of these guys has anything to complain about on that score. I'd love to see someone make a meaningful analysis of the quality of the teammates of GOAT level guy, but I never have. It's always on the level of "My guy had it tougher than your guy."

3. Leadership is a dead end topic. People always think the guy they like was a better leader than the guy they don't like.


Regarding #2, I think this is a very overlooked point. And I think this actually favors Kobe a lot. I think you also have to consider the conference difficulty (or difficulty of opponents faced) when judging the success of your team as it pertains to the quality of teammates available. The offense run is also important. For example, the 2009 Cavs on the surface, were a bad team that LeBron gets a lot of praise for carrying. However for that team's offense (similar to the 2001 76'ers offense), that set of teammates was actually quite optimal.


1. I have no idea if factoring in the quality of teammates helps or hurts Kobe's case against other GOAT level guys because I've never seen anyone come up with a good way of determining the quality of a player's teammates (or the quality if their opponents). Like I said, I rarely see anyone say anything more than, "My guy had it tougher than your guy."

2. I don't think the offense per se is the important point. It's more about how the players fit together. The sum can definitely be better than the parts, which is why I've never been particularly wowed by arguments based on how many of a player's teammates made an all-star team. But that brings up the same problem: other than the eye of the beholder, how do you determine how well a group of players fit together? Beats me.


Last edited by activeverb on Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:41 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682

PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:41 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
bfc1125roy wrote:
activeverb wrote:
bfc1125roy wrote:
I was talking purely about individual skill. When it comes to contributions to winning games, that is a different topic and will need a different breakdown.


I am confused here.

First, you said you believe that scoring and one-on-one defense are more important skills than rebounding and passing because they impacted the game more.

Now, you're say that scoring and one-on-one defense don't necessarily contribute more to winning than rebounding and passing.

Which raises the question: If scoring and one-on-one defense don't contribute more to winning, what exactly is the important "impact" you think they have on the game?


My bad, I did not phrase my post clearly.

I believe scoring and one vs. one defense are the most important skills because they have a more direct impact on the game. The goal of a basketball game is to score more points than your opponent. The two most obvious ways to do that are to score the ball and prevent your opponent (person you are guarding) from scoring the ball. With passing and rebounding, while they can impact the score significantly, there is usually a level or two of indirection there (e.g. if you make a good pass, someone else can make a pass, which then gives someone an open layup).

activeverb wrote:

Now, you're say that scoring and one-on-one defense don't necessarily contribute more to winning than rebounding and passing.


I am referring not to which of a player's individual skills contribute to winning games, but rather I was referring to Kobe and LeBron's overall contributions to winning games, That topic is more nuanced. For example, Magic Johnson, though he was neither an elite scorer nor an elite defender, was just such a good passer (and pretty good rebounder) that he made a huge contribution to his team winning games. So in order to asses each player's *absolute* contribution to their teams winning, you need more context than just Player A is a better scorer therefore he helps his team win more than Player B. That requires you to understand the offensive and defensive schemes each player was running, and how each player functioned within that specific context.

Hopefully I was more clear there.


You're clear, but you're not very persuasive to me.

You basically state that scoring and one-on-one defense are more important in affecting the score because you think they are more important, but you don't give any evidence why that is so.

And then you keeping saying over and over and over how this topic is so nuanced, yet you never go into the nuances in a meaningful way.

My take based on what you have said so far: Your viewpoint is pretty simplistic (you just really like Kobe's style of play) but for some reason you want people to think your viewpoint is so complex that it can't be explained.

Anyway, unless you're able to elevate the conversation, I think I'll move on.


Well I explained why, but I think you glossed over it.

bfc1125roy wrote:
The goal of a basketball game is to score more points than your opponent. The two most obvious ways to do that are to score the ball and prevent your opponent (person you are guarding) from scoring the ball. With passing and rebounding, while they can impact the score significantly, there is usually a level or two of indirection there (e.g. if you make a good pass, someone else can make a pass, which then gives someone an open layup).


My viewpoint isn't simplistic. I think if you read some of my other posts you will understand I actually have a very in depth understand of NBA offenses and defenses. However, like I explained to Arenas Hunter, in order for me to put each player's stats in the context of their respective offensive and defensive schemes, I will have to break down about 5 different NBA offenses and defenses. An entire book alone has been written just about the Triangle (1 offense)!

To explain why certain advanced stats aren't as "end all be all", I first have to explain how they are derived. That'll involve some "Stats 101" on what a regression is. Then I have to explain what a ridge regression is. Then I have to explain what RPM is. And RAPM. And BPM. As well as each parameter that goes into deriving those metrics. From there I can better explain things like VORP, DRPM, etc. And show you why they may not mean what you think. This would likely take 5+ pages, even if I simplified as much as possible.

That will take a lot of time, and is quite an intensive endeavor. Like I explained earlier, I am happy to do this, but I doubt if I did people will read it. If I am wrong, please point this out, and I can start a series on this subject. But I am pretty busy with the Lue-Williams offense series I am posting right now, so I will either have to pause that, or get to this one later. I do not think my viewpoint is "too complex to explain." But I do fear, that even if I put out complex arguments like this, people will dismiss them and nitpick one or two details without internalizing the meat of it.

In the mean time, if you would like to elevate the conversation, the floor is yours.

And again, if there is demand for this type of content, I am more than happy to write it. But please do not refer to my viewpoints as "simplistic." That is far from the case. You can see in this very thread I broke down the Pistons defensive strategy (at a high level) against the Lakers, to show why Kobe does not deserve all the blame for that finals series loss.
_________________
(bleep) David Stern.


Last edited by bfc1125roy on Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:46 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682

PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:44 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
bfc1125roy wrote:
activeverb wrote:

2. Every GOAT-level player is lucky with the quality of his teammates. Kobe, Shaq, Lebron, MJ, Russell, on and on -- none of these guys has anything to complain about on that score. I'd love to see someone make a meaningful analysis of the quality of the teammates of GOAT level guy, but I never have. It's always on the level of "My guy had it tougher than your guy."

3. Leadership is a dead end topic. People always think the guy they like was a better leader than the guy they don't like.


Regarding #2, I think this is a very overlooked point. And I think this actually favors Kobe a lot. I think you also have to consider the conference difficulty (or difficulty of opponents faced) when judging the success of your team as it pertains to the quality of teammates available. The offense run is also important. For example, the 2009 Cavs on the surface, were a bad team that LeBron gets a lot of praise for carrying. However for that team's offense (similar to the 2001 76'ers offense), that set of teammates was actually quite optimal.


1. I have no idea if factoring in the quality of teammates helps or hurts Kobe's case against other GOAT level guys because I've never seen anyone come up with a good way of determining the quality of a player's teammates (or the quality if their opponents). Like I said, I rarely see anyone say anything more than, "My guy had it tougher than your guy."

2. I don't think the offense per se is the important point. It's more about how the players fit together. The sum can definitely be better than the parts, which is why I've never been particularly wowed by arguments based on how many of a player's teammates made an all-star team. But that brings up the same problem: other than the eye of the beholder, how do you determine how well a group of players fit together? Beats me.


It's not just about all star teams or numerical metrics. But you can use some common sense. E.g. Dennis Rodman and Scottie Pippen are all tie great defensive players.

Regarding how the pieces fit together - you have to look at the offense the team is running. A team of passers (Odom, Pau), is a great fit for the triangle offense. While a team of shooters is a great fit for Kuester's Cavs offense he ran with LeBron.
_________________
(bleep) David Stern.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:45 pm    Post subject:

bfc1125roy wrote:
In the mean time, if you would like to elevate the conversation, the floor is yours.


This seems like a pretty standard technique of yours when people challenge some sweeping generalization you make: "I don't want to spend the time defending my statement, but I am happy to sit back and let you do all the work."

No thanks.


Last edited by activeverb on Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:51 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682

PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:49 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
bfc1125roy wrote:


In the mean time, if you would like to elevate the conversation, the floor is yours.


This seems like a pretty standard technique of yours when people challenge some sweeping generalization you make: "I don't want to spend the time defending my statement, but I am happy to sit back and let you do all the work."

No thanks.


I never said that. You're taking one sentence of my entire post out of context.

bfc1125roy wrote:
That will take a lot of time, and is quite an intensive endeavor. Like I explained earlier, I am happy to do this, but I doubt if I did people will read it. If I am wrong, please point this out, and I can start a series on this subject.


I am happy to make the arguments. I even gave you a general outline for what I might do. But like I said, I won't do it unless people actually want to read this. Otherwise what's the point?

If you read my other thread on Lue and Wiliams, I think it's pretty obvious I have the knowledge to make the posts. But I would have to put a pause on that to work on this. And people seem to like that. I don't have all day to sit here writing, unfortunately.

So far nobody has indicated they want to read it anyways. Instead of asking me to spend the time to write it, you seem to think I am somehow avoiding doing it.
_________________
(bleep) David Stern.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:55 pm    Post subject:

bfc1125roy wrote:

I am happy to make the arguments. I even gave you a general outline for what I might do. But like I said, I won't do it unless people actually want to read this. Otherwise what's the point?



I have no idea if anyone would read it. Depends largely on execution. If you started a series, I would take a look at it; whether I continued would depend on whether I found what you said was interesting.

So if it were me, two things would influence me to do or not do such a series: (1) If the mere doing of it gave me pleasure; and (2) whether the response I got to posts in forums like this indicated that there is an audience that is interested in what I have to say.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682

PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 12:01 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
bfc1125roy wrote:

I am happy to make the arguments. I even gave you a general outline for what I might do. But like I said, I won't do it unless people actually want to read this. Otherwise what's the point?



I have no idea if anyone would read it. Depends largely on execution. If you started a series, I would take a look at it; whether I continued would depend on whether I found what you said was interesting.

So if it were me, two things would influence me to do or not do such a series: (1) If the mere doing of it gave me pleasure; and (2) whether the response I got to posts in forums like this indicated that there is an audience that is interested in what I have to say.


I appreciate the feedback. It seems like this (the thread subject) is a highly charged topic, so maybe I will. Let's see what others have to say. I do want to finish the Lue-Williams series first though, since that is more relevant to the Lakers right now. And while I may prefer Kobe to LeBron, LeBron's leading the Lakers right now and he has my full support, so I'd like to see how we can maximize his talents with a new coach.

Also, for the record, I actually think it's completely reasonable to put LeBron over Kobe all time. I just think it's more "neck and neck" than some people give credit for - on both sides - for Kobe and LeBron stans alike. And that would probably be the thesis of a series I wrote on the subject, more than one player being definitively better than the other.
_________________
(bleep) David Stern.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 6:13 am    Post subject:

bfc1125roy wrote:
activeverb wrote:
bfc1125roy wrote:

I am happy to make the arguments. I even gave you a general outline for what I might do. But like I said, I won't do it unless people actually want to read this. Otherwise what's the point?



I have no idea if anyone would read it. Depends largely on execution. If you started a series, I would take a look at it; whether I continued would depend on whether I found what you said was interesting.

So if it were me, two things would influence me to do or not do such a series: (1) If the mere doing of it gave me pleasure; and (2) whether the response I got to posts in forums like this indicated that there is an audience that is interested in what I have to say.


I appreciate the feedback. It seems like this (the thread subject) is a highly charged topic, so maybe I will. Let's see what others have to say. I do want to finish the Lue-Williams series first though, since that is more relevant to the Lakers right now. And while I may prefer Kobe to LeBron, LeBron's leading the Lakers right now and he has my full support, so I'd like to see how we can maximize his talents with a new coach.

Also, for the record, I actually think it's completely reasonable to put LeBron over Kobe all time. I just think it's more "neck and neck" than some people give credit for - on both sides - for Kobe and LeBron stans alike. And that would probably be the thesis of a series I wrote on the subject, more than one player being definitively better than the other.


Personally, I have no particular interest in an analysis comparing Lebron vs Kobe. I've seen that a million times.

For me, what was interesting was the notion that you could make a case that scoring and defense contributed more to wins than passing and rebounding. Or that you could evaluate the quality of a player's teammates.

I don't see that as a Kobe vs. LeBron thing at all. It's more about seeing if you have a evaluation system that could be applied to any players. In fact, I'd be more interested in that if Lebron and Kobe weren't the focus of it.

However, I get that I am outside the bell shaped curve and most fa s dont care about this kind of analysis except in terms of whether it supports a player they like or bashes a player they dislike. And if the outcome pleases them, they often dont care if the analysis itself is logical and vice versa
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 6:23 am    Post subject:

bfc1125roy wrote:
So just for offense, I would have to in detail, break down the Triangle offense, the 4 out 1 in offense, and so on. That can get very complex very quickly, as there have been entire books written about just the options in the Triangle offense. Basically, I would have to break down about 5 different NBA offenses. Then I would have to do the same for defense. Then I could finally explain how each player's stats are represented in terms of their function in these different schemes. I could probably write 10-20+ pages just on this alone.

I think that is too long for a forum post. I also think that if I did post that, most people would probably not read it. If I am wrong, and people are interested in reading such long and detailed breakdowns comparing Kobe and LeBron, then I am happy to write these posts up and share them. I hope though, that folks who disagree with the conclusions of these posts spend some time reading the rationale behind them before criticizing my work. Just let me know. I am already doing a lot of work for the Tyronn Lue - Monty Williams series, though, so if there is interest I might have to pause that, or start this one later.


You underrate the sophistication of the posters on this board. You don't need to do any of these things to explain your point. We know this. You don't need to explain the triangle offense to make your point about Kobe and Lebron. In essence, you are telling us that your point is so sophisticated that you need to teach us about modern pro basketball before we will be able to keep up. My BS detector is beeping.

More than anything else, you come off as evasive. You started off by saying that you were already writing something about this, and now you say you don't have time and that no one would be interested anyway. I give up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 8:13 am    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
bfc1125roy wrote:
So just for offense, I would have to in detail, break down the Triangle offense, the 4 out 1 in offense, and so on. That can get very complex very quickly, as there have been entire books written about just the options in the Triangle offense. Basically, I would have to break down about 5 different NBA offenses. Then I would have to do the same for defense. Then I could finally explain how each player's stats are represented in terms of their function in these different schemes. I could probably write 10-20+ pages just on this alone.

I think that is too long for a forum post. I also think that if I did post that, most people would probably not read it. If I am wrong, and people are interested in reading such long and detailed breakdowns comparing Kobe and LeBron, then I am happy to write these posts up and share them. I hope though, that folks who disagree with the conclusions of these posts spend some time reading the rationale behind them before criticizing my work. Just let me know. I am already doing a lot of work for the Tyronn Lue - Monty Williams series, though, so if there is interest I might have to pause that, or start this one later.


You underrate the sophistication of the posters on this board. You don't need to do any of these things to explain your point. We know this. You don't need to explain the triangle offense to make your point about Kobe and Lebron. In essence, you are telling us that your point is so sophisticated that you need to teach us about modern pro basketball before we will be able to keep up. My BS detector is beeping.

More than anything else, you come off as evasive. You started off by saying that you were already writing something about this, and now you say you don't have time and that no one would be interested anyway. I give up.


If I were going to give him the benefit of the doubt, I'd tell him get over the idea that you are Newton writing an opus explaining the universe that only five scientists in the world will be able to fully understand.

Good writing is complex ideas simply told. Bad writing is weak ideas wrapped in complexity to try to fool people into thinking you are saying more than you really are.

Anyway, I regret tipping my toe into this water because of the ongoing evasiveness.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 10:18 am    Post subject:

george w kush wrote:
[while Lebron played with Carlos Boozer and Larry Hughes and even carried those bums to the finals.



Carlos Boozer was never on a Cavaliers finals team; in fact, the two years he played with the Cavs they were sub .500 teams and didn't make the playoffs.

Larry Hughes did make one finals team. But the route to the finals wasn't that hard. In the first two rounds, the Cavs faced teams that were only 41-41. The Cavs beat the teams they had to beat, but it wasn't a herculean feat to get through the east that year.

On a side note: Don't you ever get bored of coming here with no goal other than irritating Kobe fans? I don't get worked up about Kobe vs. Lebron myself, but everytime I see your screen name I cringe because I know you have such a negative, soul-sapping intent in this forum.


Last edited by activeverb on Mon Apr 22, 2019 10:35 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682

PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 10:34 am    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
bfc1125roy wrote:
So just for offense, I would have to in detail, break down the Triangle offense, the 4 out 1 in offense, and so on. That can get very complex very quickly, as there have been entire books written about just the options in the Triangle offense. Basically, I would have to break down about 5 different NBA offenses. Then I would have to do the same for defense. Then I could finally explain how each player's stats are represented in terms of their function in these different schemes. I could probably write 10-20+ pages just on this alone.

I think that is too long for a forum post. I also think that if I did post that, most people would probably not read it. If I am wrong, and people are interested in reading such long and detailed breakdowns comparing Kobe and LeBron, then I am happy to write these posts up and share them. I hope though, that folks who disagree with the conclusions of these posts spend some time reading the rationale behind them before criticizing my work. Just let me know. I am already doing a lot of work for the Tyronn Lue - Monty Williams series, though, so if there is interest I might have to pause that, or start this one later.


You underrate the sophistication of the posters on this board. You don't need to do any of these things to explain your point. We know this. You don't need to explain the triangle offense to make your point about Kobe and Lebron. In essence, you are telling us that your point is so sophisticated that you need to teach us about modern pro basketball before we will be able to keep up. My BS detector is beeping.

More than anything else, you come off as evasive. You started off by saying that you were already writing something about this, and now you say you don't have time and that no one would be interested anyway. I give up.


Well I would disagree. You absolutely need to understand the positions each player played within their respective offense to clearly see the opportunities they had for shots, assists, etc.

I could make the basic argument that no player in the triangle offense has averaged more than 6 apg per game, to show you why Kobe's assist totals have been less than LeBron's. But, it would be more powerful if I could show you the position Kobe played in the Triangle and WHY that was so, which would require understanding some Triangle principles.

I'm not at all being evasive. I question if you've read what I'm saying. I was writing the article. I stopped due to time constraints as well as wanting to focus more on breakdowns of things relevant to the Laker's season (e.g. Laker's small ball, Luke Walton's offense, etc.). Also, LeBron soon signed with the Lakers after I began work on it. And I did not want to seem like a salty "Kobe-stan" by showing that Kobe is better than LeBron in some aspects. With all of that considered, this became more of a side project.

I also said I was more than willing to post excerpts here. But there has to be demand for it. So far, my Lue-Williams topic is getting good interest and I want to keep that going as it's more relevant. The only people who have expressed interest are you and activeverb, and both of you have taken a much more negatively oriented skeptical approach as opposed to indicating you'd genuinely like to see it.

Also, in general, I would ask you to internalize how likely you are to have your mind changed by arguments that go against your initial beliefs. The way in which you respond and attack me personally seems to indicate this may not be the case. There is a psychological principle called the backfire effect where anytime someone is presented with arguments that contradict their initial beliefs, they relent and strengthen those beliefs instead. You can read more about it here: https://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/06/10/the-backfire-effect/

I'm also going to type this in bold since my posts seem to be getting nitpicked.

I am happy to write the excepts if there is interest. However understand it would take away from the Lue-Williams series. If you are interested, please indicate so. Thank you.
_________________
(bleep) David Stern.


Last edited by bfc1125roy on Mon Apr 22, 2019 11:13 am; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682

PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 11:00 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
bfc1125roy wrote:
So just for offense, I would have to in detail, break down the Triangle offense, the 4 out 1 in offense, and so on. That can get very complex very quickly, as there have been entire books written about just the options in the Triangle offense. Basically, I would have to break down about 5 different NBA offenses. Then I would have to do the same for defense. Then I could finally explain how each player's stats are represented in terms of their function in these different schemes. I could probably write 10-20+ pages just on this alone.

I think that is too long for a forum post. I also think that if I did post that, most people would probably not read it. If I am wrong, and people are interested in reading such long and detailed breakdowns comparing Kobe and LeBron, then I am happy to write these posts up and share them. I hope though, that folks who disagree with the conclusions of these posts spend some time reading the rationale behind them before criticizing my work. Just let me know. I am already doing a lot of work for the Tyronn Lue - Monty Williams series, though, so if there is interest I might have to pause that, or start this one later.


You underrate the sophistication of the posters on this board. You don't need to do any of these things to explain your point. We know this. You don't need to explain the triangle offense to make your point about Kobe and Lebron. In essence, you are telling us that your point is so sophisticated that you need to teach us about modern pro basketball before we will be able to keep up. My BS detector is beeping.

More than anything else, you come off as evasive. You started off by saying that you were already writing something about this, and now you say you don't have time and that no one would be interested anyway. I give up.


If I were going to give him the benefit of the doubt, I'd tell him get over the idea that you are Newton writing an opus explaining the universe that only five scientists in the world will be able to fully understand.

Good writing is complex ideas simply told. Bad writing is weak ideas wrapped in complexity to try to fool people into thinking you are saying more than you really are.

Anyway, I regret tipping my toe into this water because of the ongoing evasiveness.


This is pretty unfair. I never said I am Newton writing an opus, or anything close to the sort. There is a lot of context that needs to be provided for certain arguments, though, and that can get lengthy. I do want to cover things in detail, as that is what is interesting to me and also I think these discussions get boiled down into soundbites which takes away from the depth.

Regarding good writing and bad writing, that's a generalization. I would argue a good piece doesn't shy away from detail and context when needed. If you want to learn more about something intricate, you get a book and really understand it, rather than settle for shallow explanations. But I'd doubt you would call a good book "bad writing" LOL. Bad writing is if you try to mask your content in complexity when you don't have an argument. But I think it's pretty clear that, given my other posts, I don't really intend to do that. Rather I want to give the topic the attention I feel it deserves, and hasn't gotten.

Read my posts on the Lakers-Pistons series on the previous page in the topic. That will give you a sense of my writing style. But, with less evidence (e.g. plays, clips) behind it. If you feel that is bad writing and overly complex, please let me know.

It seems as though you are very concentrated on assuming I'm being evasive rather than just understanding I am a busy person, with limited time, and I'll get around to it people want. If you would like to assume I am full of (bleep) and just trying to cover up my lack of arguments with fluff about complexity, you are free to do so. I cannot change your mind if it is made up.

I'm sorry about your toe.
_________________
(bleep) David Stern.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Treble Clef
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 20 Nov 2012
Posts: 23742

PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 11:19 am    Post subject:

bfc1125roy wrote:


I could make the basic argument that no player in the triangle offense has averaged more than 6 apg per game, to show you why Kobe's assist totals have been less than LeBron's. But, it would be more powerful if I could show you the position Kobe played in the Triangle and WHY that was so, which would require understanding some Triangle principles.


I think this analysis ignores the vast differences in the style of play between them. Kobe would call his own number and take the tough shot in situations that called for a pass. The triangle was not dictating that. It was because of Kobe's score first mentality and it's the reason a lot of people here will always prefer Kobe over LeBron other than the obvious fact that he was a lifelong Laker. It is also the reason Kobe's efficiency was not always the highest in the league.

You connect the triangle to lower assist numbers because you associate it with a shoot first shooting guard being the main ballhandler. Because that is what we saw with Jordan and Kobe.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682

PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 11:27 am    Post subject:

Treble Clef wrote:
bfc1125roy wrote:


I could make the basic argument that no player in the triangle offense has averaged more than 6 apg per game, to show you why Kobe's assist totals have been less than LeBron's. But, it would be more powerful if I could show you the position Kobe played in the Triangle and WHY that was so, which would require understanding some Triangle principles.


I think this analysis ignores the vast differences in the style of play between them. Kobe would call his own number and take the tough shot in situations that called for a pass. The triangle was not dictating that. It was because of Kobe's score first mentality and it's the reason a lot of people here will always prefer Kobe over LeBron other than the obvious fact that he was a lifelong Laker. It is also the reason Kobe's efficiency was not always the highest in the league.

You connect the triangle to lower assist numbers because you associate it with a shoot first shooting guard being the main ballhandler. Because that is what we saw with Jordan and Kobe.


LeBron is a better passer and does look to pass more often than Kobe, especially in end of game situations. But you also have to look to who LeBron was passing too (usually open shooters), and you can understand Kobe's reluctance given how when he did pass in clutch situations (to Pau Gasol, Luke Walton), they fumbled and/or passed it back, and no shot was taken in time.

It would be foolish to ignore the offense, though. When Kobe was placed in an offense more similar to LeBron's first Cleveland stint, he put up a career high in assists in his 17th season. Unheard of up until that point. In fact he put up numerous 10+ assist games that season alone. Something he rarely did when he was in the Triangle.

The Triangle does a better job of distributing assist totals across the board for everyone, not just Kobe or Jordan. The Triangle involves all 5 people being able to pass, which is why it's hard to run but also why it's effective. A lot of the options out of the offense (e.g. blind pig or low post split), involve the big men making the assist. It's why Gasol and Odom's passing was so critical. A more LeBron style offense involves 4 or 5 out spacing (check out GoldenThroat's latest video on this for more), which allows him to drive, draw 2 defenders, and pass it out. Nobody in NBA history has been more adept as passing out of those situations in traffic, even cross court, than LeBron. But that means with less ball movement, he will rack up more assists. You will notice in many playoff game situations, Kobe did in fact average closer to 7-8 assists a game, when he was taking over more as needed.

Again, not to take anything away from LeBron. He is still the better facilitator and one of the best passers ever, maybe second or third to Magic and Nash. But to pin that on simply him averaging more assists than Kobe, or to say Kobe was not a good facilitator due to his assist numbers, or that Kobe was a selfish player due to his assist numbers, is a VAST oversimplification of the issue.
_________________
(bleep) David Stern.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 12:05 pm    Post subject:

bfc1125roy wrote:

It seems as though you are very concentrated on assuming I'm being evasive rather than just understanding I am a busy person, with limited time, and I'll get around to it people want. .


That's cool. It doesn't matter to me whether you write your article or not.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682

PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 12:20 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
bfc1125roy wrote:

It seems as though you are very concentrated on assuming I'm being evasive rather than just understanding I am a busy person, with limited time, and I'll get around to it people want. .


That's cool. It doesn't matter to me whether you write your article or not.


Sounds good, dude
_________________
(bleep) David Stern.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
george w kush
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 05 Jun 2009
Posts: 1167

PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 12:20 pm    Post subject:

Snipes wrote:
george w kush wrote:
Darth Los Angeles wrote:
george w kush wrote:
wolfpaclaker wrote:
I’ve actually been really impressed with Lebron at this stage in his career how great he is. Dudes been in the league since 2003 and is still when healthy a MVP.

However vs Kobe it’s always been the same for me

Lebron is the better more efficient offense player no arguing there. Only a biased homer would argue against Lebrons superiority in stats efficiency etc he’s just a better player than Kobe on a game to game basis when it comes down to offense

Here is why Kobe is the better player though imo

- Defense. Kobe in the Shaq era was one of the best defenders in the league. He was shutting down Iverson and TMac in their primes. When it comes to a single possession or down to the wire in a long series and rough physical game Kobe plays elite D. He coasted a lot late in his career but overall man defense I take Kobe.


- leadership. Kobe wills his team to win. No way Kobe allows the team to miss the playoffs or lose focus like this team did this season
- 5 rings vs 3

To me it’s still

Jordan
Kobe
Magic
Lebron

In that order

And if not for HIV it would have been Magic a top that list.



Kobe's defense during the Shaq era? He(unlike Carter/T-Mac) had the luxury of being able to expend more energy on defense due to him having a better player than him(Shaq) to dump the ball to for easy buckets. [b]Shaq was also a tremendous shot blocker during that time. It's easy to look good on easy when your job is to funnel players into your shot blocker.[/b]

And leadership? Publicly advocating to trade your teammates is leadership? Or how about snitching on your teammates? Crying to the media about management needing better players? Telling free agents they should come play with you so they can be his 'Tyson Chandler'?

He was very lucky to have been drafted by the Lakers, played with a prime Shaq early in his career and played for PJ. They also lucked out by getting Gasol for peanuts. Wonder if he would have those 3 rings if he had been drafted by the Cavs and played with Boozer and Mo Williams? Exactly. You could inserted Wade, Carter or T-Mac to play with a prime Shaq during those years and they would have won a ring. In fact we saw that scenario play out when Shaq won a ring with Wade.


3 finals MVP>2 finals MVP. And BTW he was dominant in all 3 of those rings. He didn't shoot 41% for a finals series and go 6/22 in a game 7 @ home like Kobe did.


I've been waiting for you to show yourself. Now you do it... You are just making stuff up and have no idea what you are talking about.


Shaq = 3 time All defense player during the Lakers title run, but yeah let's pretend like his elite rim protecting ability didn't matter.

Whoever Kobe was guarding, they run into Shaq.

Whoever T-Mac was guarding, they run into Steven Hunter.

It's alot easier to put more effort into defense when you have another guy carrying your team into the playoffs and finals year after year as opposed to carrying the offense by yourself.


Kobe's record during the 3-peat ERA when Shaq was out = 12-11

Shaq's record during the 3-peat ERA when Kobe was out = 25-7


If people want to debate Kobe vs Lebron, people need to acknowledge Kobe early in his career played with an elite HOF center and elite coach, while Lebron played with Carlos Boozer and Larry Hughes and even carried those bums to the finals, where as Kobe without Shaq wouldn't even make the playoffs.


And people need to acknowledge that in his prime, Lebron teamed up with 2 HOFers and at that time BOTH top 5 players in the league. ALONG with a bunch of premiere veterans for $1.2mill to FINALLY win a ring.


The difference is LeBron was the best player on those Heat teams. Was Kobe the best player on those Shaq teams? No he wasn't, he was carried to 3 rings by another player. That's the difference. Besides, you need a superteam to win in this era and if you don't have one you aren't beating the Warriors. It's similar to how the post-up game is gone and everything has gone to 3 point shooters. The game has changed. You think Kobe gets those 2 rings in the Pau era if he face the modern era Warriors, a team considered the greatest team of all time? I fail to see how Gasol is going to stop Curry, Klay and Durant from bombing 3's all night.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682

PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 12:31 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
bfc1125roy wrote:
activeverb wrote:
bfc1125roy wrote:

I am happy to make the arguments. I even gave you a general outline for what I might do. But like I said, I won't do it unless people actually want to read this. Otherwise what's the point?



I have no idea if anyone would read it. Depends largely on execution. If you started a series, I would take a look at it; whether I continued would depend on whether I found what you said was interesting.

So if it were me, two things would influence me to do or not do such a series: (1) If the mere doing of it gave me pleasure; and (2) whether the response I got to posts in forums like this indicated that there is an audience that is interested in what I have to say.


I appreciate the feedback. It seems like this (the thread subject) is a highly charged topic, so maybe I will. Let's see what others have to say. I do want to finish the Lue-Williams series first though, since that is more relevant to the Lakers right now. And while I may prefer Kobe to LeBron, LeBron's leading the Lakers right now and he has my full support, so I'd like to see how we can maximize his talents with a new coach.

Also, for the record, I actually think it's completely reasonable to put LeBron over Kobe all time. I just think it's more "neck and neck" than some people give credit for - on both sides - for Kobe and LeBron stans alike. And that would probably be the thesis of a series I wrote on the subject, more than one player being definitively better than the other.


Personally, I have no particular interest in an analysis comparing Lebron vs Kobe. I've seen that a million times.

For me, what was interesting was the notion that you could make a case that scoring and defense contributed more to wins than passing and rebounding. Or that you could evaluate the quality of a player's teammates.

I don't see that as a Kobe vs. LeBron thing at all. It's more about seeing if you have a evaluation system that could be applied to any players. In fact, I'd be more interested in that if Lebron and Kobe weren't the focus of it.

However, I get that I am outside the bell shaped curve and most fa s dont care about this kind of analysis except in terms of whether it supports a player they like or bashes a player they dislike. And if the outcome pleases them, they often dont care if the analysis itself is logical and vice versa


Well to do any player comparison you need an overarching framework. So that would probably be the first thing I would do. What constitutes that framework, though, is subjective by definition. It's impossible to create an objective framework that is the end all be all. Some people like "ringz ernuh" and some prefer "analytikksss"

Let me as you this. What do you think should comprise such a framework? How about others on the board? Your feedback will be helpful.
_________________
(bleep) David Stern.
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, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 6 of 10
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