My whole point is saying that Toronto had a bad D is just a way to try and down play what Kobe did even though there have been thousands of NBA games where one of the best scorers in the league faces off against one of the worst defense in the league and not once has anybody scored 81 points besides Kobe.
Kobe Finals Stats 1999-2000 21.1 4.5 4.4 2000-2001 29.4 7.3 6.1 2001-2002 26.6 5.8 4.6 He was def the number 2 man, but he had to be b/c Shaq was the number 1. legit stats
I think that in a single game Kobe (or prime Kobe) can certainly outscore Wade, but Wade is more consistent because his game is much more efficient. So if you look at them over the course of a season or career, Wade puts up better numbers. Their all-around games are similar (Wade a bit better). This is why I have Wade > Kobe. I think when their careers are done and Wade has 5+ titles, it'll be the general consensus too, although I consider the titles part irrelevant. Kobe's volume shooting produces 81 pt games but also games like this: http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=270531008
Yet none of those guys but up the ridiculous numbers Kobe did which is why I say it shows his greatness. You seem to think because Kobe has a flaw, bad shot selection, it automatically makes him less great. However, I feel like that trait stopped him from being even greater than he was with it. It's like taking away from Shaq because he was kinda lazy and not the hardest worker and that is why he only has 4 rings instead of 8. Of course without those flaws those guys could be better but even having them they are still better than most players.
great post, and on the whole I agree. that said, I think you are underestimating a bit the level of talent surrounding these players. None of the surrounding talent is regular all-star caliber, and certainly not HOF caliber like many other greats have had on their team, but they weren't exactly devoid of talent. Lebron - ok, this team actually was pretty much devoid of talent. That said, the eastern conference was really really bad. The Pistons were really the only other good team. The #3 seed? The Toronto Raptors. That said, credit where credit is due, Lebron led that team of nothings to the finals. Hakeem - not surrounded by all-stars, but some pretty solid solid solid players. Otis. Kenny Smith. Vernon. Horry. Cassell. Clyde - same as Hakeem. Terry Porter. Kevin Duckworth. Jerome Kersey. Buck Williams. Cliff Robinson. Ewing - same as Hakeem & Clyde. Starks. Oakley. Harper. Charles Smith. I think the surrounding casts of the above compare favorably, for example, to the Mavs current surrounding cast. The Mavs probably have a few more formerly really good players, but it's really just Dirk + very solid, sound role players. In 20 years will I think of Jason Terry in the same light as John Starks? Yes. Can Otis Thorpe be comparable to Tyson Chandler - yes.. Again, this isn't to take away from your overall point, but it is to say, the comparisons aren't all 100% accurate, imo. In 06-07, the year Lebron led his cast of nothings to the Finals, Kobe's Lakers lost in the first round. Kobe's cast was as bad, if not worse, than Lebron's. Lamar was decent, but only played 56 games. The rest of the team? Luke Walton, Smush Parker, Maurice Evans, Kwame Brown, Brian Cook, a very very young Andrew Bynum. Basically, really bad. But the West was much much much better than the East that year. Phoenix was great. Dallas was great. Utah was their typical very very good. The Spurs were still very very solid (as in won the championship solid). The Rockets were solid (until Yao's injury). It's not shocking the Lakers were the 7th seed and lost in the first round while Lebron's led the Cavs to the 2 seed, a cake-walk through the playoffs until playing the Pistons, then getting swept by the Spurs. If the roles were reversed do I think Lebron gets swept and Kobe leads that Cavs team to the Finals? Very possibly. Certainly Clyde would have a lot more championships if he had teamed with Hakeem earlier in his career, imo. But he didn't. It's a tough what if game there.
Samaki Walker started and played 47 minutes in that game. I am almost made at Kobe for not taking more shots based on that fact alone. ;-)
Wade is #3 for me. I can't talk about Jerry West because that's too long ago. I'll stick with the modern era where it's Jordan, Kobe and Wade. Kobe gets the nod over Wade because Kobe has had the longevity and the health. Wade will not catch up to Kobe because of the injury factor. An interesting argument is: if Wade and Kobe met at their best with similar teammates, who wins that 7 game series. I think Jordan would destroy both of them, but I'm not sure who's better at his best, Wade or Kobe.
not a scorer in their prime leading the league in scoring vs. a defense as bad as the raptors in a terrible defensive year where you couldn't even touch a perimeter player tho. im just saying it was the perfect storm. i give kobe props for seizing the opportunity brought forth to hm.
Well, in the 2008 Olympics when both were at or near their best, here is how they compared: http://www.basketball-reference.com/awards/uso.html Wade: 16/4/2/2 67% FG 47% 3FG 74% FT Kobe: 15/3/2/1 46% FG 32% 3FG 61% FT I sometimes here people (eg goodbug) saying "yeah, but Kobe's role was to be the defensive stopper" but then why did Kobe take way more shots than anyone else on the team? It's just his MO-- 46% volume shooter, doesn't matter where or with whom. He did it with legends (Shaq), with all-stars (Gasol), with scrubs (Kwame), and even with fellow Olympians. He always takes bad shots at 45-47%
wade is more efficient because he lives in the paint. note this is a positive thing. but when ages catch up, wade wont be able to rely on that alone. Kobe Career Number: 36.4 0.454 0.339 0.837 1.2 4.1 5.3 4.7 1.5 0.5 2.93 2.62 25.3 i dont think 45% as a SG is considered inefficient. His only below 43% fg season came during his first 2 years in the league.
I'm not sure if the raptors was the worst defensive teams of ALL TIME. Surely there are worst teams defensively. michael jordan, shaq, and kareem are three of the greatest scorers of all time who played with both good and HORRIBLE defensive teams. They never scored 81. can't downplay what kobe did. he scored 81. if you watch the entire game again (i think nbatv shows it occasionally), its not like all his shots were wide open shots. they were all pretty tough shots with some and-1's here and there
Thank you. Kobe is being really underrated in this thread. Just take a look at Wade's team the last couple of season's before this one.
I'll say it again: Dwayne Wade is better than Kobe Bryant. In the NBA finals, Dwayne Wade absolutely takes over and raises his level to that of Jordan. I can't say the same for Kobe. Basing your opinion on one game (Wade fumbling; Kobe's 81) is stupid.
you can say it again but that doesnt mean you're right. dwayne wade has played in what, 2 final series?
Your point? If Wade was teamed up with Shaq in LA, he'd have 5+ finals appearances as well. Then you'd tell me that Wade is better than Kobe because Kobe didn't have enough finals appearances? How about we just look at their games instead of finals appearances? Seems much more fair. I'll still take Wade.
