In 1987, when MJ got his 37.1 ppg, the league averaged 109.9. In 2006, when Kobe got his 35.4 ppg, the league averaged 97.0. 35.4/97 > 37.1/109.9, that's how I see it. late 80s, numbers were inflated.
Don't confuse the West with the East. What's the difference, really? Pippen and Grant together put up the same if not better numbers then O'Neal. Many people forget Horace Grant averaged a double-double during the Bulls first run and Quitten averaged 20ppg 8rpg 6apg and 2 spg during the same span. So what is the big difference?
It's hard to find West's games because games weren't widely recorded like they were in Jordan's era and today. If anyone wants to compare Kobe to Jordan, it's easier to make a legitimate comparison than comparing anyone to West. It's not that hard to find Jordan-era Bulls games to watch.
Yeh, and I guess MVPs, defensive player of the year awards, championships, ,steals, blocks, all-time highest single-game points record and being one of three players to average 30+/7+/7+ all-time (Kobe not being in the list once again)...all those were inflated too. Besides saying that is like saying Kobe's career high (81)>Jordan's career high (69) therefore Kobe>Jordan...which would make for a bad argument.
If you actually watched the games from the 80s, you will see that the game was not inflated at all. The biggest difference between the game today and in the 80s to early 90s is the quality of role players. There is not a lack of superstars in today's game, but there is a huge drop off from your star player to the role players. Thats why the scoring has dropped off so dramatically. Just take a look at the Rockets the last previous years, after Yao and Tracy, there was a huge gap in talent. The same could be said about almost every other team in the league. Who did KG have in Minn? Who did Kobe have before Gasol? Who does Lebron have? The list goes on and on. The quality of play in the NBA is a result of having too many teams and the fact that many scrubs are now being over paid. Guys like Stromile Swift are now making double of what franchise players were paid even in the 90s! For most of Barkley's career, he made somewhere in the neighborhood of 2 million per year I believe.
This thread already got shelfed! http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?p=3710014#post3710014 But in case your too lazy to read the other thread, I'll just put this one to rest too... MJ23 > KB24
Consider this most of great and good teams in 80s top 3 or 4 bench players, where players who were former all-stars, top scorers on lower rung team, great youngsters, or players who could start on other teams. I don't really see alot of teams like that now, even though they were common at the beginning of decade with some of those Trailblazer teams, the Kings of 2003, Pistons of 2004, or Mavs (2003/2005). What does all of this means? It means that if you have quality players on the bench you are naturally going to score more points and shoot at higher percentage. When people say a team like Los Angeles has great bench, I kind of chuckle. Because their bench is Farmar, Walton, Turiaf, Ariza, and Vuijiac. It's ok ....but is it as good as Pistons (04): Okur (all-star), Williamson (former starter), Atkins (fs), Campbell (fs), Hunter (great defender), and Darko. Kings (03): Christie (all league defender), Clark (great shot blocker/defender), Jackson (B.) (good above average pg), Jackson (J) (probably the best non-all star player of all time), and Pollard (S.) Mavs (03): Williams (Walt), Van Exel (all-star), Bell (Raja) (great defender), and Najera. You could put most of these players in as starter and you wouldn't see a big drop off unless it is superstar they are replacing. I'm not criticizing their bench or anything....I don't think it is good as good as it is made out to be, didn't even use any from 80s or 90s, which blow 00s away.
Sorry, but if MJ played in today's NBA with the Hand Check rules that are in place, he would have averaged 45 points a game and the whole role player argument...the NBA had more talent back then due to there being a less teams to spread out the talent...also most guys played through college and were more fundamentally sound, though arguable less athletic
y'know Blake, I have to agree with you on everything except that last part...though arguably less athletic. I think some of those athletes could hang and are probably still just good athletes as some the players are today. I believe Dominque Wilkins is just as good as athlete as VInce, T-Mac, or Kobe.
Give me Magic over both...But Kobe isn't even close to MJ as far as I'm concerned. The guy is incredible and the closest thing but Kobe has had the better supporting cast (when successful) for one.
Its a good point, but he only pointed out one player! There are probably 10 or so guys in the league right now who can jump like Dominique did compared to the 2 that could do it back then (mike and nique). I'd say overall the NBA is quite a bit more althletic than it used to be, with the obvious freak of nature exception of players like Dominique.
why compare kobe to jordan? jordan did everything you could do in the game. kobe should be compared to wade and lebron. when jordan matched up against his next best competitor it was lights out. i have seen wade and lebron routinely outplay kobe. it's just because kobe imitates jordan's style. i personally put kobe on drexler's level. maybe slightly above.
Are you guys kidding me? Lets way and see how Kobe does the next 5yrs and how many more rings, MVP, scoring titles he can still win..... all these comparing Kobe to Jordan is like people comparing 50 Cent to Tupac when 50 drop his 1st album and where is he rank now? Way to early to tell ..... and also Kobe still has ALOT to prove
I think people always compare Kobe to Jordan because of the way Kobe plays his moves and style is very similiar to Jordan. You never hear people compare Wade or Lebron to Jordan.
Uh...I dunno where you're going with this reference, but I need to interject just to say that seriously, 50 will NEVER be as legendary as Tupac was and still is. With that said, Kobe still has a very slight chance of being on Jordan's level, although it'd take a three-five peat with multiple regular season and Finals MVPs/scoring titles to get there considering Kobe's age.
yeah, their games are similar. but kobe's is a lot uglier. jordon's combination of build and athletism and coordination makes his game much more aesthetically pleasing to watch.
