OT: Kobe retiring

[PcketknfNiels]

I only gave the stats 19-31. For both. So, yeah. Sorry, you're wrong:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanko01.html#1998-2010-sum:per_game

Match them with the numbers I posted.

As for the rest, you can only be going by the eye test to pick Kobe over LeBron. Even the the post season, LeBron has been better. Watch Game 7 of 2010 and 2013 if you disagree there.

I'm not really wrong as much as you worded your initial post very poorly and didn't until just now provide the resource that you used to make your claim. If you look at Kobe's 2000-01 to 2009-10 playoff stats he compares pretty equally in pure statistics to Lebron, and over that span won 4 rings to Lebron's current 2.


To put this another way, Doug McDermott had a better regular season than Shabazz Napier by any measure in 2013-14, would you at any point in the season have traded Shabazz 1:1 for McDermott? Doubtful.

 

[PcketknfNiels]

In the last 30 years, Duncan and LeBron are better, arguably Shaq and Olajuwon as well.

Again, that's not really a diss on Kobe. He was a very good player, one of the 10-15 best. I lean towards the 15 with @champs99and04 in putting him closer to 15, but that's still pretty amazing.

Duncan yes, Hakeem probably, Lebron and Shaq? No. Shaq was more dominant in his prime, but Kobe had the better career, Lebron was slightly better in their respective primes, but he'd trade his career accomplishments for Kobe's in a cocaine heartbeat.

Like @Hoophound said, basketball is a lot about will, guts, and swagger, and a lot less about raw stats than someone like you realizes. You seem misplaced as a basketball fan, that purely analytical approach belongs in baseball.

 

[Kitaman]

Its impossible to position Kobe's greatness, including preferential comparisons. Kobe immeidately followed Jordan, which is tough to do, however 5 Championships is a nice feat considering his albatross.

If you took Lebron and gave me Kobe I wouldn't cry. Same with many others ranked better. On any given night they all can spank one another and all are great players. The point is few players are in their category at respective positions.

Allen Iverson was a great player in his own right, and will be recoginized during HOF voting. I just think some players were really good and a lesser number were great.

Its fun to argue, but prime to prime is a fun comparison for shlts and giggles.

 

[intlzncster]

Duncan yes, Hakeem probably, Lebron and Shaq? No. Shaq was more dominant in his prime, but Kobe had the better career, Lebron was slightly better in their respective primes, but he'd trade his career accomplishments for Kobe's in a cocaine heartbeat.

Like @Hoophound said, basketball is a lot about will, guts, and swagger, and a lot less about raw stats than someone like you realizes. You seem misplaced as a basketball fan, that purely analytical approach belongs in baseball.

Might work on the court, but not so much on a message board. You make some good points, but could have done without the attitude. Takes away from your overall message.

I'll take Lebron over Kobe, but acknowledge that Kobe's had a better career. If Lebron wins won in Cleveland, that all changes.

 

[intlzncster]

Allen Iverson was a great player in his own right, and will be recoginized during HOF voting. I just think some players were really good and a lesser number were great. Its fun to argue, but prime to prime is a fun comparison for shlts and giggles.

Iverson is definitely underrated. Would have loved to see him play with a better collection of players; the only question would be if he could mesh with them. He dragged a pretty ordinary team to the Finals that year, where Aaron Mckey was the second best player on the team! Think about that. As a bonus, Ollie was on that team: he definitely had an impact.

 

[PcketknfNiels]

Might work on the court, but not so much on a message board. You make some good points, but could have done without the attitude. Takes away from your overall message.

I'll take Lebron over Kobe, but acknowledge that Kobe's had a better career. If Lebron wins won in Cleveland, that all changes.

I think commenting on any attitude is pretty unwarranted. Not sure where you're coming from with that.

 

[intlzncster]

I think commenting on any attitude is pretty unwarranted. Not sure where you're coming from with that.

Hey just telling you how you are being perceived in that post by probably everybody on here. If you want to make your posts weaker, that's up to you. But there's too many arseholes on the internet already, so it'd be great if we had less on here. Makes the board more readable. But again, do as you like.

 

[PcketknfNiels]

Hey just telling you how you are being perceived in that post by probably everybody on here. If you want to make your posts weaker, that's up to you. But there's too many arseholes on the internet already, so it'd be great if we had less on here. Makes the board more readable. But again, do as you like.

You didn't really answer me. All you did was come up with a presumptive accusation. Based on how our conversation is going it seems like you're the one being an here.

But regardless, I'm not sure how whatever issues you seem to have with my attitude would detract from the relevant information in my posts. That seems very odd.

 

[blackbird]

Peak Wade was probably better than peak Kobe. It's really close...closer, I'm sure, than many imagine.

You've got to be kidding me.

People let their hatred of the guy cloud their judgement when talking about how good he was.

 

[tzznandrew]

You've got to be kidding me.

People let their hatred of the guy cloud their judgement when talking about how good he was.

If we're picking peaks--and Wade's peak was roughly from age 24-30--I'd say they're very close and Wade may have the edge. He was more efficient from the floor, and scored at a similar rate per 36, while also playing similar defense. Hell, anyone who watched the 2006 Finals had to have seen a player who performed in the Finals at a higher level than nearly anyone else ever did at that level. That said, picking Kobe's peak is reasonable.

But for a career? For a career it is Kobe, no question. But that's not what I ever said. Yet I'd suggest you've let the media suggest peak Kobe was better than he really was if you think the comparison is completely absurd.