I can agree with that. If you have a bad team Lebron is the better player because he can do so many things. However, if I have a well built team I'm taking Kobe because I don't believe your best player needs to be the best at everything. I just get annoyed with the Kobe only having 2 rings as the man argument because he didn't really get to be the man with a quality team until midway through his 12th year in the league and he did work with that squad. IMO he was out of his prime by the 2010-2011 season so we are only talking about a 2.5-3.5 year window max.
Not discounting pointing out he didn't lead those teams to titles. Some folks make the mistake thinking Bron or others need to lead a team to 5 titles to catch Kobe, as if Kobe did that. Folks act like Kobe has led a team to more rings than Shaq or Duncan as well.
Put LeBron James on any team in the NBA, and they will win 50 games at least Can you say that for Kobe
Based on what? Kobe hasn't led his team to 3. Now if you give full weight to other super stud dudes who didn't lead their team to a title (i.e. McHale in 86) then that changes the whole convo, but I'm sure you can admit most don't give credit that way. I guess my question is why does LeBron have to lead a team to more titles than Kobe did for the convo to start?
The Bulls only won two less games when Jordan left and that was with Pippen missing for a six or so game stretch. Regular season wins do not determine greatness.
Because Kobe wasn't given the keys to a quality team until year 12 in his career while Lebron got it in year 8. Also, Kobe does deserve some credit for those first three rings so I think factoring that it in it is fair to say 3 but that's just my personal opinion. To just say 2 is ignoring that Lebron will likely have many more opportunities as lead dog to get more rings.
And? What does that have to do with anything? Can't I just assume if LeBron were given Shaq for 8 years that he would already be sitting at 3? Of course Kobe deserves credit. But not the type that you are extending to him. Kobe hasn't led a team to 5 titles. That's like saying Duncan needed 1 more ring to match Kobe...a dude he led a team to more titles than.
Kobe would have won 3 without Shaq.... that is reasonable.... but man think about that, a former 13th pick coming into the league for a few years and he has the top 3 pivot of all time in his prime going to war with...... It's all about chemistry..... they did not win one with Karla and the Glove
Don't necessarily agree with the bad team rap.... Kobe is a more dangerous player shooting daggers and being one on one, but Lebron improved a lot mentally....now he is better than ever this year thanks to Hakeem Kobe stated that he learned from the masters of the game all his life whereas Lebron started learning from others the past two years.... Think about that. Championship rings do not reveal everything. You tell me who is more gifted..... given that Kobe has more killer instinct.
It has everything to do with it if you are going to say that Kobe only has two rings as the main guy. He basically spent 4-7 of his prime years either playing with Shaq or a really bad roster. And sure you can give Lebron 3 rings with Shaq but then you have to let him spend 3 years with a team made up of the likes of smush parker, luke walton and kwame brown before he gets anything decent around him. I'm giving him 1/3 of the credit for 3 rings. You think it's better to just say the first 8 years of his career don't count when factoring in how good of a player he is? If we are saying the comparison starts at 2 rings then that is basically what you are doing.
Come on, man. I get you appreciate Kobe more..... Lebron has already been punished by playing with a mediocre team... That was CLEVELAND for a few years
