So you admit that there's something wrong about ranking players based on stuff they don't control but you're still sticking to it? Well don't you think there's something wrong with that then? I mean, obviously you can't go around telling people whatever, but IMHO instead of sticking with the status quo you should start changing the way you look at players. And anyway like I said before if team success is your metric than why is Jordan your GOAT instead of Russell? The whole "getting penalized for having great teammates" doesn't seem to hold water to me because one of the arguments for being MVP is being the best player in the best team. In fact Dirk won the MVP for this very reason (that, and they didn't want to give it to Nash). The fact of the matter is if you're really amazing enough then if you have great teammates you should be even better than the player with the lousy team. Good players don't just take away from your stats, they make you more efficient and actually make the game easier for you (no more triple teams!). However in this case we have the player A with the worse team having the better record than player B with the better team. I don't know how you can even make it clearer than that.
Titles are won by teams right? Compare the PER of teams with each other and I bet the team with the higher combined PER wins the game.
Great post...as great as lebron james is...his game is relied on his size, strength and athleticism....when he gets older and slower could he add something effective as his go to move?...jordan had it, kobe has it now.
Except for a catch and shoot situation, I'll go with Lebron because he'll make the right play more often than Kobe
Or maybe the Lakers were favored because they breezed through the West, including the defending champion Spurs, while the Celtics struggled to finish off the 37-win Hawks and the 45-win Cavs in 7 games. And do you remember the differences in the performances of James and Kobe with everything on the line? James went out the loser in an epic shootout against Pierce, reminiscent of Bird vs. Wilkins from the 80's. Kobe shot 7-22 in 43 minutes of a 39-point blowout loss that wasn't even a game by the first few minutes of the second quarter.
I think it's really funny how everyone keeps using this championship argument, completely ignoring the fact that Hollinger mentions it himself in the article. And the article is about Lebron having the best two-year (regular season) individual stretch in the modern era. That's it. Considering that he's comparing to Jordan in the 80's, the championships are irrelevant, Jordan didn't have them then either.
Do you remember how LBJ looked clueless with Spurs' trap in 07 finals and Kobe easily picked it apart with precise mid-range in 08 WCF? So much about moral victory, in pro sports, it doesn't count. LBJ did push Celtics to 7 games, shooting 35%, had he shot 40% or better, they might as well have won it. And yes, if an analyst is all about momentum and can't see the mismatch in playoff series. He may as well be called a bandwagon fan.
An analyst is supposed to make use of all the information at his disposal to make as good a prediction as possible. Who cares what their opinion was at the time of the trade, several months before the playoffs? Taking into account team performance in the second half of the season, as opposed to stubbornly sticking to an opinion from several months before the playoffs and before a big trade, does not make you a bandwagon fan. And leaving aside ESPN, Vegas had the Lakers winning the 2008 Finals: http://www.betwwx.com/86/lakers-vs-celtics-finals-odds-and-prop-bets/ They were favored.
But you know those odds makers were just band-wagoners. The Celtics had homecourt advantage, therefore they must have been favored!
Lebron James is a very good player. He is a future HOF. He is a walking triple double waiting to happen. He is very talented for his size. But to compare him to Jordan is just rediculous. Jordan is probably one of the best player to play the game. Lebron is a much better athlete than Jordan but he is not even close to being a better basketball player. If you think about it in todays game, the new NBA rules help guys on the perimeter much more than the old days. The new hand checking rules help Lebron get to the line whenever he wants. Lebron would square up his defender and then charges towards the rim and 9 out of 10 times, he would get a foul call. Plus Lebron is so strong and much faster than anyone guarding him, it makes it easier for him to score. Lebron and Jordan are two different players. Jordan is more finesse and he has an arrays of moves including his mastered post game. Lebron on the other hand, just charges straight in and hoping to jump over the opponents to dunk or get a foul call. Talent level, Lebron isn't even close to Jordan, Wade, or Kobe. But it is his physicality that gives him the advantage. When his athletic ability starts to decline, Lebron would have a tough time succeeding in the NBA. Though, most likely he would be a facilitator, he wouldn't even be as effective. But Jordan and Kobe will be a deadly threat until they retire because they both have so much arsenal in their offensive game. If you take away Lebron's size and athletic ability, and put him in the same body as Wade or Kobe, would he still be as good? I'm not taking anything away from Lebron but I'm tired of seeing the media and the NBA trying to make Lebron better than Jordan. Lebron is a great player but he will never be as good as Jordan. It isn't fair to compare this two players. Jordan is a smaller player that is 6'6 and weighing about 215 lbs and his true position is SG. Lebron is 6'9-6'10 and weights over 250 lbs and he mainly plays the SF position. If Lebron James was about the same size as Jordan and put up the numbers he do now, then it is better to compare the two but when one player has all the advantage over the other, I think its an unfair comparison. So overall, Lebron is a better athlete than Jordan and Kobe but MJ and Kobe is a better basketball player than Lebron.
I missed how you determined that Kobe is a better basketball player than LeBron. And I think its important we make clear what we mean by "better" here. Let me put it this way: Suppose you could choose one or the other to have on your team for a season, and the rest of the roster is filled out at random from a pool of NBA players. Your only concern is winning a championship this season (forget the future). You'd take Kobe Bryant over LeBron James?
I hate how people bring up handchecking. For one, players are all much more physically imposing today than back then. Second, LeBron would be even more valuable with handchecking allowed because while many other players would be slowed down, he is such a force that he would probably make out better than most anyone else.
I think stern and his army of refs will help him to catch MJ, just like they helped MJ to catch Bird and Magic. James is a great great player, and the refs will turn him into a superman with the favorite calls.
While I think LBJ and Shaq are great players, I just simply hate it when they get the benefit of the foul call. Because they are superstars and strong as hell, there's no offensive foul or more than often they draw fouls from the opponents. Recently I'm watching some classic games from the past. I'm amazed at what MJ or Dream can do and they did it cleanly. But when I watch LBJ or Shaq, once in a while I would suspect how they can always draw those debatable fouls. NBA allows big men to wrestle against yao and do whatever they want, but wouldn't allow anybody to touch the outside players. In a way it screwed what basketball game should be played. No wonder Chamberlain can get 100 points and LBJ can do whatever he wants, because the rules are changed to set up those 'heroes'. Now just imagine there's no 3 seconds rule and hand-checking(let alone push or wrestling) is not allowed to centers, yao would stay under the basket all day and legally occupy his space without pressure. I wonder how LBJ can possibly slashing into the lane to score or get fouled. Yao would also average 50 pts!
If I am playing one game on the street to decide my fate, I'll go with Kobe Bryant. Without those touchy fouls and you can just run over people and get a call, I really want to see how effective LBJ would be.
Handchecking rule is not the problem. The problem is how inconsistent handcheck is called on daily base. It's almost reserved only for selectively few players.
Holy ****. For ****s' sake, Kobe gets superstar calls too. So does Wade, Melo, and to a lesser extent probably 20 other players who will get the benefit of the doubt over most everyone else. So STFU with this 'LBJ is only so good because of the refs' bull****. Kobe fans ****ing crying because people think LBJ is better than Kobe. 'Oh but LBJ gets all the calls.' Will you listen to yourselves? Kobe ****ing Bryant? You're telling me he never got a foul call go his way? Are you telling me he hasn't been at the top of the food chain of ref benefits for the past 8 years? Stop b****ing and at least come up with a better ****ing excuse.* *Excessively crude language was used to get this point across for the 12th time now. Kobe is a fantastic player. At least use a legit reason. This has been a public service announcement.
The games are being playing under the rules/officiating of the National Basketball Association. Not on the street. I thought that was understood. And its not one game. Its a full season, with the goal being winning a championship. I take it your answer is still the same, though?
