If Kobe gets his ring this year, how is he not the GREATEST?

Of course I've heard of Dr. J. And once again, you're taking my point out of context. I didn't say Jordan changed the game of basketball. Every generation, there will be a great player that comes along and changes the game itself in some way or form.

What I'm saying is, Jordan defined the "modern guard" as we know it today. Players like Lebron, Wade, Kobe, and Carter all modeled their game after Jordan since they grew up watching him. Don't tell me these guys watched Dr. J play coz he's way before their time.

On the contrary, I don't think Dr. J could do everything from a "pure basketball standpoint" as Jordan. Dr. J thrived in the ABA but suffered greatly after joining the NBA. He was a highflying, prolific scorer and that's about it. He may be entertaining to watch, but he never had the "total dominance" on every level that Jordan had.

Yes, Dr. J inspired part of Jordan's game. But guards never did the kind of stuff that Jordan did until he came along. And I'm not simply talking about dunks and flashing scoring ability. I'm talking about the "whole package" such as defense, rebound, scoring, dunking, steals, leadership, total dominance, clutch scoring, passing, blocks, etc. You get my point....

 

Michael Jordan has the highest career PER OF ALL TIME.

Kobe is 17th.

Pau Gasol has a higher PER than Kobe this year. Shaq had a higher PER during Kobe's first 3 rings.

 

No, it's idiotic because MJ was the undisputed leader and best player of six championship teams. Kobe was a second banana on three of his four teams. So we should really be comparing Kobe to Pippen.

 

I'm going to say this again because you don't seem to get it. MJ NEEDED a sidekick. Kobe NEEDED someone else to lead him to three of his four championships.

 

Who cares about a big? Just about every aspiring championship team in league history except for MJ's Bulls had a dominant big man. So the answer is, everyone cares about a big except for you.

And Gasol is widely recognized by anyone who actually watches the game as, at worst, the second or third best big man in today's league behind Howard and possibly Bosh. JVG, for one, has called him by far the best big in today's game.

 

Dude this is very simple. You claim he is the best ever. Currently, Jordan is considered the best ever. So he must be better than Jordan.

There are several ways to approach this:

1) Team achievements.
2) Individual achievements.
3) Individual statistics.
4) Strength of supporting cast.

There is no other way you can approach it. In those 4 categories, Jordan is better with 1, 2 and 3. Your argument is that Kobe has a weaker supporting cast. Even assuming that's true, it doesn't make up for the monumental difference in 1,2 and 3.

So let's look at 4 then.

You claim Pippen is a HOF'er and that's a big deal. You would know, if you weren't too young, that ever since Pippen was put in the top 50 NBA players, he has been the most criticized entry into the list. He is notoriously the least deserving player in that list.

Keep in mind that Pippen became considered that good after playing with Jordan, not before. Anyone can rationally argue that, had Pippen not been playing with Jordan, he would not be HOF'er. The rest of the cast was average. Essentially - MJ's utter dominance AMPLIFIED his supporting cast. THEY feed off HIM.

Kobe on the other hand has Pau, Bynum and Artest. These guys are just as good before Kobe than after Kobe. None of these guys are projected as HOF'ers because being on Kobe's team has not made them better such that they would be considered awesome. None of them have changed. Essentially, at best - Kobe has NO effect on his cast. Either he feeds off THEM, or there is no relationship at all.

Now, seeing as you can not deny Jordan's dominance in category 1, 2 or 3.. and you can not look me in the eye and tell me Kobe dominates category 4, not even close..

On what basis exactly do you think Kobe is better than MJ? Can you create a list of things Kobe has done better than MJ? Scoring, rebounding, passing, winning, defending, etc?

Just about the only thing is that Kobe is more clutch. Then again, Aaron Brooks is pretty damn clutch, but he's certainly no Steve Nash or Magic Johnson. One quality can not solidify your argument.

So we would like to see this list. Maybe we are not seeing what you're saying here.

 

Shaq> Pippen.

Shaq won a ring without Kobe. Pippen never won a ring without Jordan.

 

Somebody close this thread, for the love of God. It was funny at first, but now rock4ever's stupidity is just making me sad.

 

You also need to take into account rule changes and quality of opponents. Kobe has to accomplish much more than MJ did in his time in order for him to be considered on par with him.

 

And he's accomplished a lot less, in a crappier league with no hand checking.

Our 2 Kobe nut-huggers are pathetic. They're making me hate him, and I'm one the few guys here who actually likes Kobe.

 

Kobe is playing in a much more guard friendly era.

And look at all the Hall of Famers Jordan had to beat:
Stockton and Malone, Barkley in his prime, Gary Payton, Clyde Drexler, Patrick Ewing. Guys like Hakeem and David Robinson were also in the league.

He also had to get past Isaiah Thomas and Magic Johnson. Though they were at the end of their careers, they were still good.

Kobe played in the era where the East was garbage and they beat the Reggie Miller led Pacers, the Iverson led 76ers and the Kidd let Nets. Come on, those have to be some of the weakest Finals teams ever.

 

All those names in the bolded part you menationed were in the West, i bet if Jordan faced them year after year after year in the playoffs he would'nt have reeled off a 6 peat. Who did he face in the playoffs instead? The Reggie Miller Pacers you mentioned and joked about, John Stark & Patrick Ewing's Knicks (LOL!!!!) and a beat up Pistons bad boy team

Kobe's Lakers faced the Spurs, The Blazers, THe Jazz, The Kings, those guys remained at the top of the standings year after year or stacked with immense talent. They're no joke. I agree with you the Eastern teams were nothing compared to the Western teams...but what does that tell you if his teams made it out of the tough West then?

 

sorry not 6 peat, 2 3peats so 6 championships

 

I'll give you the Spurs.

But Malone and Stockton were near the end of their careers when Kobe beat them, while Jordan faced them in their primes. The Jailblazers (best player Rasheed?) and Kings (best player Webber?) were overrated and soft.

The East wasn't garbage when Jordan was playing. I mean, Jason Kidd and the Nets in the Finals? Really? Remember Jordan had to get past Shaq in 1996. The Knicks were very good in the early 90's. It took 7 games for the Rockets to beat them.

 

Kings overrated?

Is that how you decide which team is better? Simply by their best player? Well, 2004 Pistons? Billups? And, yeah, Webber in his prime wasn't anything special .


1998-2001 Kings were high-flyers and somewhat not what a traditional "true contender" might be, but 2002-2004, they had a great chance to win the championship in all 3 seasons.

2002 - WCF (Peja returning from injury)
2003 - Webber Injury, still 7 game series vs. Mavs
2004 - Bobby Jackson injured (6th man of league), still 7 games vs T-Wolves

Most people who have been apart of this website as long as you have tend to have a brain. You seem to be a special case. Either that or you're just desperate to make a point.