forget Jordan and Kobe... Lebron should worry about hakeem

[knicksman]

kobe = 2001

28ppg season, 29ppg playoffs

shaq = 2001

28ppg season, 29ppg playoffs

his overall 3 peat stats are 25/5/5



lol@ help

kobe had the higher defensive team rankings aswell, main play maker, main ball handler, main clutch player




he was co-leader... the lakers real finals was in the west when kobe was dominating... shaq won finals mvp against garbage east teams. there was no competition, no tight games, mostly blow outs. and in those types of games shaq always gets fed the ball more since there is no worry about him going to the line with a good lead. when things were tight in the west. shaq rarely saw the ball down the stretch

shaq won with 6th man kobe.. enough said

[DMAVS41]

Kobe detractors always do, they say only 2 of his 5 rings "count" because he played with Shaq for the first 3.

People are hypocritical about this and there's a huge double standard for counting rings. Wilt is considered to have 2 rings even though West was better for 1. Look at Bird vs. Magic as an example. Magic is usually ranked ahead of Bird largely because he has 5 rings and Bird has 3. However, Magic was the undisputed best player on his team for only 2 of his championships. Yet all 5 "count" when comparing him to Bird? Heck, Kobe was actually closer to Shaq in 2001 and 2002 than Magic was to Kareem in 1980, but only 2 of Kobe's rings "count" (2009 and 2010), yet all 5 of Magic's "count"? . How about Dr. J and Oscar? Same thing. One ring, not the best player-no problemo!

I know someone will inevitably cry "Robert Horry!" or "Derek Fisher". Are you seriously comparing Horry's or Fisher's role to Kobe's? I propose a different standard: the indispensable player standard. Kobe, Dr. J, Pippen and Oscar--as well as players like Shaq, Kareem, and Magic at times were not the best players on their teams but without them they could not win. Fishers 9 ppg in the playoffs on the 3-peat Lakers or Horry's 8 ppg and 6 ppg on the Lakers/Spurs championship teams were replaceable by journeyman players.

"Rings as the man" is not always clear. Why should it even matter? If one player was 40% responsible, another 30% responsible, and the other 10 players 30% responsible does that 10% really matter? I look at whether a player was indispensable. If you replaced a player with an above average player at his position would his team still win? If so, I give him less credit.



I'm not comparing Wade to Shaq. That wasn't my point to compare them as players.




Except Kobe was closer to Shaq than Wade is to LeBron right now, especially '01 and '02.



LeBron visibly pouted and quit on his team in an odd turn of events after game 3 vs Boston in 2010.

Kobe was never going to leave the Lakers IMO. He was just pressuring the front office to bring in talent. He did what he did and got Gasol after Bynum got injured. Dude's "temper tantrum" turned the organization around in a matter of months. Perhaps if guys would quit sitting on their hands wanting the public and the media to like them they'd get shit done.

Anyway Kobe has played every game of his career with one team and even Magic Johnson asked for a trade once. Why should Kobe should be punished because the Lakers refused to honor his wishes and instead tried to build a better team? Kobe never said "swing a Gasol deal" he said "trade me to bummy Chicago to play with Ben Gordon"

But yes, Kobe did bitch and he asked for a trade. However I doubt he was ever going to leave, I think it's obvious he was trying to spark a fire under management to bring in pieces, but let's say he legit was going to go to the Chicago Bulls with Ben Gordon/Kirk Hinrich. That's not nearly the same as colluding to join forces with two other superstars all in your prime.

Kobe wasn't asking to be traded to a team with a superstar who he'd essentially be competing otherwise and measured against. Kobe didn't ask to be traded to Duncan's Spurs, KG's T-Wolves, Nash's Suns, Wade's Heat, LeBron's Cavs or Dirk's Mavs.

Who cares what these players wanted or what team they joined? The only way it would matter is if Lebron went to a team that was so good that they could just never lose and it was competitively unfair...which is absolutely not what the Heat are.

I swear...listening to Kobe fans and Lebron haters go on and on about how unfair the Heat team is...is just so damn annoying.

I remember before the 11 Finals...a ton of Lebron haters and Kobe fans were saying that it wasn't going to count because the Heat were so stacked. LOL...then they lose to one of the least talented championship teams of all time.

Wade is absolutely great. A top 15 player of all time...maybe even higher when it is all said and done. But outside of Wade...that team is nothing special...Bosh is grossly over-rated.

But again, it is funny to see Kobe fans...the same fans that shrugged off Wade since 05...refer to him as such an elite player when it suits the agenda to knock Lebron.

Guess what. If you want to win more than 2 titles in the NBA as a superstar...you are going to need all nba players for help. Unless you are Duncan....

We all know Kobe's first 3 rings count. He just wasn't really an elite player until his 5th year. He was very good in year 4, but not really elite. I still don't understand why people ignore the fact that Lebron doubled the Cavs wins in year 1...and then put up in year 2 a season that statistically would be in Kobe's top 5 probably with 28/7/7 on 47%fg.

So lets see how Lebron ages and what happens with his career, but so far comparing Lebron's first 10 years to Kobe's first 10 years....its not even comparable. Lebron destroys him in a landslide.

[tpols]

DMAVs what do you think about Shaq's career with the opportunity/success ratio? He played with..

Prime Penny
Prime Kobe
Prime Wade
Prime Lebron

Pretty incredible help all his career.. Thats the best assemble of perimeter talent for a big man, probably ever.

Would you agree that Hakeem had a better career since he had more success for the opportunity he was given?

[tpols]

.

So lets see how Lebron ages and what happens with his career, but so far comparing Lebron's first 10 years to Kobe's first 10 years....its not even comparable. Lebron destroys him in a landslide.

Yea for sure.. Lebron was definitely more NBA ready. Which was rare.. most HS guys took time to adjust before they exploded.

Well see if Lebron can still get it like Kobe in his 15th+ season. Hell probably have surpassed him all time by then anyways but it will be interesting to see how well he ages.. because Kobe has aged better than anybody couldve imagined.

[DMAVS41]

DMAVs what do you think about Shaq's career with the opportunity/success ratio? He played with..

Prime Penny
Prime Kobe
Prime Wade
Prime Lebron

Pretty incredible help all his career.. Thats the best assemble of perimeter talent for a big man, probably ever.

Would you agree that Hakeem had a better career since he had more success for the opportunity he was given?

Really good point. I've thought about this often. Totally agree that Shaq goes under the radar, but he's been blessed to play with a ton of talent.

It's hard for me because the level of dominance that Shaq reached for a few years on the Lakers is just really unlike anything other than a select few in NBA history.

I don't know if Hakeem had a better career, but he definitely proved he was able to win more with less. Hakeem is just so damn hard to rank....it is just my opinion, but I believe Hakeem's numbers make him out to be better than he actually was. I know that is not a popular opinion, but it's just how I felt at the time and feel now.

But again, I don't think Shaq's place in history comes from his 4 rings largely. It comes from his impact and dominance.

But your point is well taken...and supports what we all know deep down. Even the best players of all time needed a lot of help to win titles. I don't know why people try to pretend otherwise.

Having said that, imagine if Dirk and Shaq switched teams for their entire careers...

Shaq might win a title or two, but he also might now. Dirk with Kobe for 8 years and then with Wade for another 2...that is at least 3 titles...probably more. I wonder where people would rank them? Would Shaq be known as a guy that couldn't win? Interesting to thing about.

[DMAVS41]

Yea for sure.. Lebron was definitely more NBA ready. Which was rare.. most HS guys took time to adjust before they exploded.

Well see if Lebron can still get it like Kobe in his 15th+ season. Hell probably have surpassed him all time by then anyways but it will be interesting to see how well he ages.. because Kobe has aged better than anybody couldve imagined.

Yes.

I think it is very likely that Kobe will age better than Lebron, but Lebron was just so damn good early on that it might not be a big enough of a difference to mean a lot. But it will certainly be interesting and all it really means is that we can talk about all this stuff and it's fun, but you can't really say anything until a players' career is over.

Just take Duncan for example...people acted like he was done after 08. If you really watch and pay attention, Duncan has been amazing. Really outside the 11 playoffs...Duncan has been way better than he gets credit for.

He averaged 19/10/3 in 10 in the playoffs
He averaged 17/9/3 last year in the playoffs
He's averaging 17/10/3 in the regular season this year

Now, he's obviously not as good as Kobe is right now, but what Duncan is doing is crazy...especially because his defensive impact is still so great.

Kobe will be able to put up 30 until he's 50. And he's played great this year. I hope they get into the playoffs and we get to see what he can do...because his last 2 years in the playoffs haven't been too good.

[Rubio2Gasol]

Really good point. I've thought about this often. Totally agree that Shaq goes under the radar, but he's been blessed to play with a ton of talent.

It's hard for me because the level of dominance that Shaq reached for a few years on the Lakers is just really unlike anything other than a select few in NBA history.

I don't know if Hakeem had a better career, but he definitely proved he was able to win more with less. Hakeem is just so damn hard to rank....it is just my opinion, but I believe Hakeem's numbers make him out to be better than he actually was. I know that is not a popular opinion, but it's just how I felt at the time and feel now.

But again, I don't think Shaq's place in history comes from his 4 rings largely. It comes from his impact and dominance.

But your point is well taken...and supports what we all know deep down. Even the best players of all time needed a lot of help to win titles. I don't know why people try to pretend otherwise.

Hardly.

His numbers are spectacular, but when you look at the game and watch how he influenced it....that's something else. When you can simultaneously hold it down on the perimeter on picks, adjust fast enough to protect the rim and then just carry an offense at the same time, that's no joke.

The responsibility he had defensively eroded his offensive numbers. It's one thing being able to defend - superstars can do that at an elite level - but having to carry a defensive burden is different. If he was in a situation where he could switch on an off defensively like most superstars though he would average 35 a game.

[Mr. Jabbar]

lebron fans are skipping to the finish line. its sort of disrespectful

well, they were taught shortcuts are ok in life from their hero....

[DMAVS41]

Hardly.

His numbers are spectacular, but when you look at the game and watch how he influenced it....that's something else. When you can simultaneously hold it down on the perimeter on picks, adjust fast enough to protect the rim and then just carry an offense at the same time, that's no joke.

The responsibility he had defensively eroded his offensive numbers. It's one thing being able to defend - superstars can do that at an elite level - but having to carry a defensive burden is different. If he was in a situation where he could switch on an off defensively like most superstars though he would average 35 a game.

This is exactly why I say Hakeem gets a little over-rated here imo. And it kind of happens with every great two way big man other than Duncan. I think KG and Hakeem tend to get over-rated a bit.

The way you describe Hakeem...where do you rank him all time? I think I have him at 9 or something. He was of course great, but so were all the other players in the top 10. I don't think it is crazy to rank Kobe over Hakeem...although I have Hakeem higher...but the player you describe above should never be ranked behind a guy like Kobe or Bird or Magic...and I definitely thought Magic and Bird were better than Hakeem....

[Rubio2Gasol]

This is exactly why I say Hakeem gets a little over-rated here imo. And it kind of happens with every great two way big man other than Duncan. I think KG and Hakeem tend to get over-rated a bit.

The way you describe Hakeem...where do you rank him all time? I think I have him at 9 or something. He was of course great, but so were all the other players in the top 10. I don't think it is crazy to rank Kobe over Hakeem...although I have Hakeem higher...but the player you describe above should never be ranked behind a guy like Kobe or Bird or Magic...and I definitely thought Magic and Bird were better than Hakeem....

Honestly, I rank him above everyone including Jordan if I had to simply subjectively pick a player.l I don't like ranking players, and never participate in all time rankings, I think there's too many variables.

Career wise, he didn't win as much as others and the fact is there are some inexcusable series losses...where he performed great..but he still lost. I'm not going to pretend I think those three were better players than Hakeem....but they deserve what they get for their successes.

It's not about him being a 2 way big either. I'm not a big man guy...not like those dudes who get nostalgic about Russel and Chamberlin and KAJ or even Malone.

Hakeem to me is the exception because of how much he could do. He could beat you on the boards,in the lane, offensively, defensively, off the dribble,post up fade away...any way you want. And it's for that adaptive capacity that he's an exception for me personally.

I'm not trying to impose my thoughts about Hakeem on anyone though...that's unrealistic. People aren't going to rate him as high as I do and that's natural.

[DMAVS41]

Honestly, I rank him above everyone including Jordan if I had to simply subjectively pick a player.l I don't like ranking players, and never participate in all time rankings, I think there's too many variables.

Career wise, he didn't win as much as others and the fact is there are some inexcusable series losses...where he performed great..but he still lost. I'm not going to pretend I think those three were better players than Hakeem....but they deserve what they get for their successes.

It's not about him being a 2 way big either. I'm not a big man guy...not like those dudes who get nostalgic about Russel and Chamberlin and KAJ or even Malone.

Hakeem to me is the exception because of how much he could do. He could beat you on the boards,in the lane, offensively, defensively, off the dribble,post up fade away...any way you want. And it's for that adaptive capacity that he's an exception for me personally.

I'm not trying to impose my thoughts about Hakeem on anyone though...that's unrealistic. People aren't going to rate him as high as I do and that's natural.

I get it. Hakeem was great. We just obviously differ hugely here.

[Hoopz2332]