It's quite a revision when you euphemize threatening to leave and b****ing about the lack of talent around him to "staying and persevering."
Kobe's first couple of seasons were ineffective because he wasn't ready to dominate from the jump and LeBron was.
He's talking about the '07 Cavs who didn't have any business being in the playoffs, much less the Finals. LeBron has done more with less than any player in the history of the NBA. After he left Cleveland, that team was one of the worst teams in NBA history.
Eddie Jones played a part in Kobe not getting the chance to dominate from the start. Lebron was thrown onto a terrible team where his development was more important than winning.
Kobe not being ready to dominate had more to do with it. If he were capable of doing what Bron did early on he woulda got more burn. But he didnt have a tank body to allow that.
I nominate Iverson with that award. One of the worst teams in NBA history is a gross exaggeration. They were bad, yes. But they were no where near last season's Bobcats level or Washington Wizards in the last few seasons.
Which was the more Talented Team? 2007 Calaviers or 2001 76ers? That is for all the screams of LeBron taking a team with nothing to finals What Iverson did that year was insane NOW! Which one of these players got their first championship because they joined a team with a NBA Championship already? LeBron or Mike Jordan (or Kobe) For all the screams of MJ didn't do it without Pippen NeitherPippen had just recently won a championship right before MJ Wade had a championship . .. had won it as a Lead Horse MJ was the undisputed #1 and pippen was 2. . . pippen was NEVER 1a LeBron went to be 1a but he won when he became 1 and Wade is now 1a . . The feeling is . . . LeBron was more dependent on Wade than MJ was on Pippen is it true . .. meh? never know . . . Rocket River
I didn't euphemize anything. Using the word "threatening" is not euphemizing. I simply ignored that part in my argument because he had every right to call out on management for not doing more, which they listened and got Pau eventually. Look, I don't want to debate with you guys if you can't even properly use the concept of "euphemism" or "revisionism". Get an education first.
Please. He's totally correct in his assessment of the situation, and it IS revisionist history to think otherwise. Two years after the Shaq trade, Kobe pouted like a little b****, just (like Ray Allen predicted he would) when his team sucked (despite getting decent talent in Odom & Caron Butler-- which is as good a deal as you'll get for a superstar in a trade). He said he would rather "play on Pluto", demanded a trade, and basically acted like more of a diva than LeBron ever has. That he never got traded (because he wouldn't agree to go to a stripped down team and the Lakers weren't going to take garbage in return) does not equate to "staying and preserving", except by euphemism, because he most certainly would have left had he not been under contract; eg, the situation LeBron was in. Anyone who followed basketball in LA at the time knew this was true.
What Iverson did that year was remarkable, and if not mistaken, he, like LeBron, go the MVP for it. But his supporting cast was better than the '07 Cavs. He had the DPOY in Mutombo and good (but forgotten) young players in Aaron McKie, Eric Snow, and Theo Ratliff. More importantly, he had Larry Brown who is a far better coach than LeBron has ever had. But still, getting that squad to the Finals was a major achievement.
Did you even read my original post? All I said in the post was Kobe stayed and Lebron left. The guy called that comment revisionist. How is it revisionist??? No matter how much you spin this (and yes, Kobe did put up major drama), Kobe is still with the Lakers and Lebron left the Cavs. I'm simply stating a fact. What happened behind closed doors with management had nothing to do with my original argument nor did I even mention any of it in my original post. I've been consistently agreeing with both of you that Kobe brought much drama to the Lakers back then. He even publicly toyed with the idea of going to the Clippers. I agreed with you. How is that euphemism. So, did he stay? YES. Did he persevere? YES How? Because he got a new team where he was the leader and brought them to the championships. Did he put up a fuss about it? YES, but that's nature of the NBA. It's always about the business. You either bring me a championship team or I leave. He's competitive like that but it also makes he a douche bag to some fans. And now, after Jerry Buss left management to his son, it looks like the Lakers can care less about an aging Kobe. None of my comments are revisionism or euphemism. Stop misuse these terms. I may have ignored certain arguments but did not change history. I hate arguing with dumb ass people.
Kobe stayed because he couldn't lesave. He wasn't a free agent. LeBron was. So if you wanna prop a dude for persevering when he couldn't leave due to being under contract...go ahead.
1) Wade hadn't been out of round 1 since 2006 2) Every Bulls title winning team had more talent on the roster than LeBron just won with. The team almost went to the ECF's without Jordan!!! Just give the dude his props.
Jordan's second-run, I'll give you that. But the first-run, it was basically him and Pippen. The rest are a bunch of role players: BJ Armstrong, Horace Grant, Bill Cartwright, John Paxon, and Will Perdue are the notable ones that you're probably familiar with. The rest have faded into oblivion. Now for the Heat, you got the Big Three, then you have Battier (no need for introduction), Miller (3pt specialist and better shooter than Paxon), Haslem (solid PF/Center and way better than Bill Cartwright), Chalmers (up and coming talent and better than Armstrong). The 96-97 Bulls squad is amazing and legendary. You can't ever match that kind of talent. But Jordan really maximized talent out of that first-run squad though.
This is your original statement which I referred to as revisionist euphemism. "Kobe didn't jump ship... like LBJ". Except, you left out the part about how he demanded to be traded. How he b****ed to management to have Bynum traded to for Jason Kidd, a bonafide superstar who had been the carrying Nets. A Historical revisionism is the reinterpretation of views on evidence, motivations, and decision-making processes surrounding a historical event. It's pretty damn clear that Kobe's motivation was not to stay and persevere. The management got Gasol, which appeased Kobe (and for good reason), who you dismiss as being a big softy. Consider this: Gasol's PER in the playoffs in which the Kobe won the championships: 2009: 21.9 2010: 24.0 Compared to Wade's PER in the playoffs in which LBJ won the championship: 2012: 22.0 Both LBJ and Kobe got pretty much equal help from their sidekicks on their route to winning their Chips
