Red Mosquito

Kobe knows he isn't winning a ring at this point. If he thought he could do it, he would have taken millions less. His championship is going to be proving he can still play and go out at a high level. Hopefully he goes back to ballhog chuck it Kobe. That would be amusing.

verb_to_trust wrote:Kobe knows he isn't winning a ring at this point. If he thought he could do it, he would have taken millions less. His championship is going to be proving he can still play and go out at a high level. Hopefully he goes back to ballhog chuck it Kobe. That would be amusing.

I've never known the rapist to be anything but ballhog chuck it Kobe Bryant. Funny thing is.......if you look at a list of everone's top 20 greatest players ever, most would have Kobe Bryant in it. Now look at everyone's field goal percentage on your list.

That's why he's nowhere near my list.

gems and rhinestones wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:Kobe knows he isn't winning a ring at this point. If he thought he could do it, he would have taken millions less. His championship is going to be proving he can still play and go out at a high level. Hopefully he goes back to ballhog chuck it Kobe. That would be amusing.

I've never known the rapist to be anything but ballhog chuck it Kobe Bryant. Funny thing is.......if you look at a list of everone's top 20 greatest players ever, most would have Kobe Bryant in it. Now look at everyone's field goal percentage on your list.

That's why he's nowhere near my list.

He's not a top 20 player for you all time? Crazy talk.....

gems and rhinestones wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:Kobe knows he isn't winning a ring at this point. If he thought he could do it, he would have taken millions less. His championship is going to be proving he can still play and go out at a high level. Hopefully he goes back to ballhog chuck it Kobe. That would be amusing.

I've never known the rapist to be anything but ballhog chuck it Kobe Bryant. Funny thing is.......if you look at a list of everone's top 20 greatest players ever, most would have Kobe Bryant in it. Now look at everyone's field goal percentage on your list.

That's why he's nowhere near my list.

Michael Jordan's career true shooting percentage was .57 (.58 in Chicago). Kobe's is .55. Are you really docking Kobe That much because of .02 percent, especially considering Kobe has played the majority of his career in an era where zone defense is legal? We all have reasons for disliking players but this seems a bit unfounded.

Kobe's top 20, but he'd be towards the bottom of that group for me probably. I think those rings he got with Shaq tend to inflate his perceived level of greatness.

He's in the 8-12 range.

There's two things that make basketball rankings really tough for me: how to compare Centers to everybody else and my pre-Magic and Bird basketball knowledge isn't great. Like I "know" than Elgin Baylor and Oscar Robertson are two of the all-time greats, but I have no idea how to compare them to Kobe or other modern players.

4/5 wrote:Kobe's top 20, but he'd be towards the bottom of that group for me probably. I think those rings he got with Shaq tend to inflate his perceived level of greatness.

so should lebrons greatness be diminished cause he had to go to wade and bosh for his?

Peeps wrote:

4/5 wrote:Kobe's top 20, but he'd be towards the bottom of that group for me probably. I think those rings he got with Shaq tend to inflate his perceived level of greatness.

so should lebrons greatness be diminished cause he had to go to wade and bosh for his?

Ohh no you didn't!!!

Peeps wrote:

4/5 wrote:Kobe's top 20, but he'd be towards the bottom of that group for me probably. I think those rings he got with Shaq tend to inflate his perceived level of greatness.

so should lebrons greatness be diminished cause he had to go to wade and bosh for his?

I'm not trying to attack Kobe and discredit him, but the fact is that he wasn't the best/most dominate player on three of those championships. That's not his fault, and he definitely did his part to help get them but let's be honest there are plenty of two-guards who could have won with Shaq at that time.

My personal opinion is that we focus too much on rings when it comes to figuring out how great a player is. For a guy like Kobe that obsession skews the perceived level of greatness in his favor. For a guy like Barkley it skews it against him. But if you were to pair Chuck with the most dominate player in the game for a few seasons I guarantee you he walks away with a few rings. Does that make him any better or worse? IMO, no.

red calzolaio wrote:

peeps wrote: so should lebrons greatness be diminished cause he had to go to wade and bosh for his?

Ohh no you didn't!!!

I think it just shows how no matter how great an individual player is he needs help, MJ included. To me it reinforces the idea that we overvalue rings as a measure of greatness. Sure, they're important, but they're nowhere near the end-all some people like to make them out to be.

Actually, LeBron is a perfect example. By almost any measure last season was his best season, yet he was an insane Ray Allen 3 and a couple missed FT's by SA from losing. He was no better or worse at the game of basketball in the hours leading up to and then following those games, but man did the perception of him dramatically increase from things that he had no control over. And I get it, and of course championships matter. But not as much as people act like they do.

Also, I've never liked Kobe so I'm definitely biased.

4/5 wrote:

Peeps wrote:

4/5 wrote:Kobe's top 20, but he'd be towards the bottom of that group for me probably. I think those rings he got with Shaq tend to inflate his perceived level of greatness.

so should lebrons greatness be diminished cause he had to go to wade and bosh for his?

I'm not trying to attack Kobe and discredit him, but the fact is that he wasn't the best/most dominate player on three of those championships. That's not his fault, and he definitely did his part to help get them but let's be honest there are plenty of two-guards who could have won with Shaq at that time.

My personal opinion is that we focus too much on rings when it comes to figuring out how great a player is. For a guy like Kobe that obsession skews the perceived level of greatness in his favor. For a guy like Barkley it skews it against him. But if you were to pair Chuck with the most dominate player in the game for a few seasons I guarantee you he walks away with a few rings. Does that make him any better or worse? IMO, no.

the dream says hello....

Peeps wrote:

4/5 wrote:

Peeps wrote:

4/5 wrote:Kobe's top 20, but he'd be towards the bottom of that group for me probably. I think those rings he got with Shaq tend to inflate his perceived level of greatness.

so should lebrons greatness be diminished cause he had to go to wade and bosh for his?

I'm not trying to attack Kobe and discredit him, but the fact is that he wasn't the best/most dominate player on three of those championships. That's not his fault, and he definitely did his part to help get them but let's be honest there are plenty of two-guards who could have won with Shaq at that time.

My personal opinion is that we focus too much on rings when it comes to figuring out how great a player is. For a guy like Kobe that obsession skews the perceived level of greatness in his favor. For a guy like Barkley it skews it against him. But if you were to pair Chuck with the most dominate player in the game for a few seasons I guarantee you he walks away with a few rings. Does that make him any better or worse? IMO, no.

the dream says hello....

Jordan was still around the first two years (the last that Hakeem could be considered for that mantle, but his numbers had alread dropped off in a major way after their two championship seasons) and then Shaq definitively took over. By then The Dream was 35 years old and a shell of his former self. So was Barkley for that matter.

Get well soon, Pooh.

Monkey_Driven wrote:

gems and rhinestones wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:Kobe knows he isn't winning a ring at this point. If he thought he could do it, he would have taken millions less. His championship is going to be proving he can still play and go out at a high level. Hopefully he goes back to ballhog chuck it Kobe. That would be amusing.

I've never known the rapist to be anything but ballhog chuck it Kobe Bryant. Funny thing is.......if you look at a list of everone's top 20 greatest players ever, most would have Kobe Bryant in it. Now look at everyone's field goal percentage on your list.

That's why he's nowhere near my list.

Michael Jordan's career true shooting percentage was .57 (.58 in Chicago). Kobe's is .55. Are you really docking Kobe That much because of .02 percent, especially considering Kobe has played the majority of his career in an era where zone defense is legal? We all have reasons for disliking players but this seems a bit unfounded.

Michael Jordan's shooting percentage in Chicago was over 50 percent. Kobe Bryant is 45 percent. Jordan would have committed suicide if he shot that poor in his prime years. Hell Jordan shot damn near 45 percent in his second year with Wizards as a 40 year old. Also Kobe Bryant is in an era where you can't hand check. Dumars said no way in the world could anyone come close to stopping Jordan if the rules they have now where rules back when Jordan played. Bryant is over rated beyond anything I can think of.

4/5 wrote:Kobe's top 20, but he'd be towards the bottom of that group for me probably. I think those rings he got with Shaq tend to inflate his perceived level of greatness.

Ya he was a side kick on 3 rings. I can see people comparing him to Pippen but the Jordan talk is hilarious. Like Jordan ever would have been a sidekick.

Peeps wrote:

4/5 wrote:Kobe's top 20, but he'd be towards the bottom of that group for me probably. I think those rings he got with Shaq tend to inflate his perceived level of greatness.

so should lebrons greatness be diminished cause he had to go to wade and bosh for his?

Lebron is the main guy on that team. The guy everyone knows would be there no matter what team he was on. He might not win it but he'd be right in it no matter what team he played for. Kobe Bryant was an also ran. The year after Shaq left the Lakers didn't even make the playoffs. Then the league cheated and gave them Pau. Ya it turned out that Marc Gasol ended up good but at the time that trade was a complete joke. I remember the Grizzlies were offered a ton from several teams for Pau but turned them all down. Then they took the worst offer and hooked the Lakers up. Then if you look and see who the Grizzlies general manager was at the time.............Jerry West.

Anyway Kobe Bryant is good but not all that. His field goal percentage tells me so.

Just one of many examples:

On game-tying or go-ahead field goals in the final 24 seconds of the fourth quarter or overtime of playoff games, LeBron is shooting 42.1 percent (7-of-17) while Kobe checks in at 25 (7-of-28). Jordan topples all with a 50 percent clip (9-of-18). http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1813 ... ver-lebron

Can't believe people think he's soooo good.


I gotta leave the debate I started because it'll get ugly if I keep commenting.

Comparing the rules changes is problematic, though. While hand checking has been outlawed, now we have zone defenses. Both create their own difficulties for scorers, but IMO the truly great players of either era would adjust without much problem and still be great under either circumstance. But let's not act like the rules of the 80s and 90s made it so much harder to score than today. From 1984-1995 the scoring average per game was between 100-110 points. Over the past decades it's only reached 100 twice, and has varied from 93 ppg to 100.4. If zone defense and hand checking were both allowed games would be nearly unwatchable.

4/5 wrote:Comparing the rules changes is problematic, though. While hand checking has been outlawed, now we have zone defenses. Both create their own difficulties for scorers, but IMO the truly great players of either era would adjust without much problem and still be great under either circumstance. But let's not act like the rules of the 80s and 90s made it so much harder to score than today. From 1984-1995 the scoring average per game was between 100-110 points. Over the past decades it's only reached 100 twice, and has varied from 93 ppg to 100.4. If zone defense and hand checking were both allowed games would be nearly unwatchable.

You're absolutely right. I personally believe zone defenses are much harder to score on that man to man defense that allows hand checking. With the latter you could just beat your man one and one and have a shot. Zone defense would bottle that up. There is a reason why there are far less 20+ ppg scorers now than there were in Jordan's era. I don't think you can really seriously listen to former players talk about how dominant they would be in today's game. It is really difficult to compare players across eras.