Prime Drexler vs Present Kobe?

People may disagree with me, but Kobe.
Jordan is the greatest shooting guard, as well as player IMO, but the next TWO shooting guards are Tmac and Kobe.
Unless serious injuries mess up their careers.

So to answer your question......Kobe.

 

Gimme Kobe.

What's scary is that Kobe at age 23 is much better than Clyde at age 23.

 

Kobe was an early bloomer. That doesn't necessarily mean he will ever get any better.

Look at Gary Payton for the opposite.

 

Kobe maybe because he's a better ballhandler, but clyde was avg 20pts,8rebs and 8 asst by his 3rd yr in the league which made him about 23 or 24. Kobe is a real incredible talent, but until Shaq leaves or slow down, its hard to gauge just how good he is or will become. How good would Clyde had been if he played with Hakeem in his prime? What if Jordan Had Hakeem instead of pippen? Thats why I think McGrady is the best 2 guard followed by maybe pierce as a close second. Compare McGrady's supporting cast to Kobe's and its really no comparison.

 

Clyde. If Drexler was playing with Shaq right now, in his prime, you would all be talking about how amazing Glide was. When he had a dominant center he got his ring, and it was at the end of his career... think about that. Of course I'm repeating myself from the other thread, sorry!

 

Really? Clyde's stats would suffer from having a guy like Shaq down low.

I don't know how hyped up Clyde would be if he was averaging 17-20 ppg.

 

Clyde may have won some rings with Shaq. But that doesn't mean that people would consider him to be even better than he was.

 

How could he be better than he was?

 

Very tough call. Defensively, Clyde had better anticipation and was a better team defender (played more help D, etc.), while Kobe gets the nod for one-on-one defense. Offensively Kobe is a better handler and is better at creating his own shot, while Clyde was a slightly better passer. Clyde was definitely a better rebounder. If I HAD to pick one I'd take Clyde, but I really think they are dead even. If Kobe gets much better I would say Kobe.

I disagree with kidrock8's statement that Clyde's stats "would suffer from having a guy like Shaq down low." Kobe's got it made. The Lakers essentially run their offense through just two players, and all the other players on the team are there for only two reasons: defense and three-point shooting. Clyde was on a Rick Adelman team when he was with the Blazers. They were very similar to the Kings today in that they were stacked with multi-talented players, and the offense didn't go through just one or two players. Look at Mike Bibby! Everyone thought he would lead the league in assists, but his assists went way down because there are too many good passers on that team. With the Blazers it was the same deal! If anything, Clyde's stats would have been helped if he was on the Lakers.

 

Well said.

 

Drexler: if they are playing against each other, but then again, we don't know if we've seen Kobe's prime yet. Drexler could lean on Kobe and wear him out during a game. Drexler played very physically. Nobody can lean on Kobe these days, so its hard to say how he would react. Given all that, I still pick Drexler.

 

I would trade Francis for either one of them in their prime.

DaDakota

 

Push.

 

Kobe would tear Drexler up 1-on-1, because Kobe has a one-on-one type offensive game, with the crossover and fadeaway.

5-on-5 it's basically even.

I disagree that Drexler is the much better rebounder.

Drexler may have slightly better rebounding stats, but he played in an era where there were more shots taken per game than Kobe, so of course his rebound totals would be higher. Kobe averages about 6 a game. Clyde averaged 6.1 during his career...

 

Uh, those Blazer teams were nothing like the Kings team of today. The Kings team of today has more shooters/ballhandlers/passers than the Por teams of the late 80s.

Kevin Duckworth will never be mistaken for Pete Maravich, ditto for Buck Williams.

Porter was a good PG, and Robinson was good off the bench. But Por did not have the same type of players that Sac has today, to run the same type of offense.

Also, Sac's offense is a creation of assistant coach, Pete Caril, the old Princeton coach. Caril is the father of motion/backdoor offense.

 

Nikos-I never said the Blazers weren't as good as the Kings. They are both probably equally good, but they were 2 completely different teams.

Like you said, the Blazers had athletes galore. Jerome Kersey was among the most athletic players in the NBA, combined with Clyde, and Robinson, the Blazers had decent sized guys who could run and jump.

The Kings, on the other hand, aren't really that athletic, except for Webber. Everyone else on their team might be considered below average athletes, like Christie, Bibby, Peja, Divac, etc. The Kings make up for that by executing their offense, which allows them open shots. They are the best passing team in the league and one of the best shooting teams in the league.

 

Bryant's never even been the best player on his own team, Drexler carried two teams to the Finals. Case closed.

 

Well Drexler never would have been the best player on his team either if he had Shaq on it...