i've been reading all of your comments in this thread and you honestly have no clue what you are talking about.... continue............
As I was going back and forth with him i kept thinking boy I feel like this guy is so unbelievably wrong that I don't even know how to respond. I thank you for your post.
Well, Worthy wasn't a guard. So you have Dennis Johnson, Pippen, and Dumars. All players who were known primarily for their defense. In any case, you've made your point. You've named several HOF guards who didn't have the stats that a 1995 Hardaway did. However, they were known more for their defense than they were for their statistics. Nevertheless, I can name a ton of players who put up comparable stats to Penny but didn't make the HOF. Like I said, for the purposes of this argument, Penny's finals numbers are irrelevant. My contention was that during the 94-95 season, Hardaway wasn't a HOF caliber player. In 1995, Hardaway was only 23 years old and in his 2nd year. When you talk about players in the context of the HOF, you're talking about their prime. I don't think anyone considered a 23 year old Hardaway to be in his prime. Just b/c you keep saying it doesn't make it true. Remember when we got the big 3 of Olajuwon, Drexler, and Barkley? It was such a good story b/c it was about 3 HOFers past their primes teaming up to get Barkley a ring. When do you think Kobe's prime ended? What about Jordan's?
You are making a weird argument then. Completely ignoring Penny's stats on the biggest stage in basketball makes little sense of you are judging what caliber of player he is. I could understand not counting them if he didn't have really good numbers during the regular season and then just showed up for the finals but that just wasn't the case. When I talk about people in the hall of fame I'm talking about their career not just one or two really great seasons. In 1995 Penny was playing at a hall of fame level. His body couldn't hold up so he couldn't repeat that over a long period of time but that doesn't mean he wasn't playing great basketball when he was healthy. His age is irrelevant if he is putting up numbers. Kobe's prime end after the 09-10 season. Last year you could really start to see Kobe truly decline as a player. Jordan's prime probably ended after the 72 wins season. You seem to be arguing that a player's prime only last a few years and I disagree. A lot of players lose a step but they are just as good or better because they become smart players. First 3 peat Jordan was great but so was second 3 peat Jordan. He lost some athleticism but developed a deadly fadeaway. You keep going back to player's best statistical years but Jordan had his best year his third year in the season and that was not prime Jordan. Hakeem had his best season his 6th year but that wasn't prime Hakeem either to me. Lebron is currently putting up numbers that he probably will not be able to put up 3-4 years from now but I'm welling to bet that future Lebron will be a lot better than the one right now.
Kobe was set to be in LAC or LAL. LAC reserved enough for max and offered that. And LAC had Brand in his prime and a lot of young prospects. Not sure what they'd achieve but they'd run deep into playoff for sure. And no, I don't think Shaq was better than Kobe at that point. He just played in a team built around him. Plus, if the F4 couldn't win a championship that year, it's very likely the window was closed. With Malone's having a serious injury, Foxing retiring and Fisher going for better pay. They just weren't good enough to beat Spurs for the next few years. Lakers made a good decision to keep Kobe and trade Shaq, but they didn't get good value in return, they should have traded Shaq to Mavs for Dirk, that trade was available.
