EPTNBA Playoffs 2012 - Page 222
| Forum Index > Closed |
Shellshock
United States97276 Posts
| ||
|
Holcan
Canada2593 Posts
On June 07 2012 04:24 jeeeeohn wrote: Michael Jordan is a patent egomaniac who branded himself as the "GOAT," which simply insults every great player before him. Kids need to learn that basketball has a history that extends beyond MJ. Wilt Chamberlain was, is, and always will be the greatest of all time. Then you have Bill Russell, World B. Free, Bob Cousy, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Iceman, Doctor J, Dominique Wilkins, Pistol Pete Maravich (who was Rondo before Rondo was Rondo), Tree Rollins, Doc Rivers, The Detroit Bad Boys, Scottie Pippen, Hakeem the Dream, Nate Thurmon, David Robinson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Reggie Miller, Bill Walton, Patrick Ewing, Moses Malone, George Mikan, Alex English, James Worthy, Rick Barry, Elgin Baylor, John Havlicek, Clyde the Glide, Jerry West, Dolph Schayes, Dennis Rodman, Kevin McHale, Elvin Hayes, Bob Pettit, Charles Barkley, Karl Malone, Gary Payton, Tiny Archibald, Walt Fucking Frazier, Isaiah Thomas, John Stockton, Oscar Robertson, and a hundred others. All of the above have been overshadowed by an amazing player who came in at the right time, the right place. However, just because everyone says he's the greatest ever to play, doesn't make him the GOAT. He doesn't seem like a particularly good person, either. Kobe is just doing exactly what MJ did, but gets hated on because he wasn't the first to brand his own name. Everyone seems to think that basketball started when Michael Jordan came into the league. As a matter of fact, there are entire generations of amazing players that may or may not have been better players and better people. I'm sick of MJ. No one else gets any love. this list is just a list of hall of famers, the only one that dominated like jordan was bill russel and wilt the stilt, no one else on that list can compete for goat. and pistol pete was NEVER close to rondos level, not even with in shooting distance, you severely over estimate the skills these players had. most were dominate at one thing and mediocre at everything else, or just above average. no one could score like jordan, and only kobe can mimic him in todays game. | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On June 07 2012 04:34 Tyree wrote: Let me repeat that You did NOT watch that LA team when Shaq was the alpha male on that team. Either you are young and this was before your time or your interest in basketball came after Shaq left, there is no other plausible explanation. So what, he still isnt winning any rings without Kobe in that team, No Kobe is not Jordan, Kobe is still relevant as an all time great. I mean the rings argument is stupid because well Horry has like 7. Yes Shaq was the the alpha male on that team, and that was a problem because it was a terrible relationship with Kobe wanting the same role. But no one puts Shaq in the discussion because for all his dominance over a stretch he was limited in what he could do as a player (Orlando lololol and dont get me started on the hacking). Numerous playoffs games that you probably saw since you seem to be old enough to have "watched basketball back then" will attest to this. People are making it sound like having good players on your team is some kind of handicap to how you should rate how great a player is. That is quite retarded for reasons that should be quite obvious. | ||
|
FreedomMurder
Canada200 Posts
On June 07 2012 04:25 XaI)CyRiC wrote: Jordan and Kobe are definitely comparable, how can anyone possibly deny that? You can argue that Jordan was better, but not even comparable? Arguing that Kobe isn't even a top 10 player draws some serious doubt from me as to your opinions as well. His accomplishments alone put him there, and his athleticism and skills cement it. How many players have accomplished what he has? How many players have broken the records he has? You can say that he isn't the best ever and that he's a bad teammate, but saying he's not comparable to Jordan or even top 10 is just ignoring the facts. Going to need to provide better arguments and evidence than that to be convincing. Some things to consider: Shaq failed to win a ring in ORL with Penny (who was the "next Jordan" of that time), didn't exactly cakewalk to a threepeat even with Kobe, and was also there when the Lakers lost to the Pistons while being guarded by Ben Wallace (undersized to say the least). I'll agree with you that Shaq was about as unstoppable as you could get during his prime, but that doesn't mean he would have won those three championships without Kobe. They aren't comparable I'm sorry. They just aren't. Kobe is forced, he wants to be Jordan he said it himself. He has the worst shot selection I've ever seen in my life. Kobe gets mad if another player on his team garners more attention than him just for a second. Jordan effected the game like nobody ever has. Averaging a higher field goal percentage, ppg, rpg, spg, blocks per game and less turnovers. In the playoffs the statistics become even more widespread. I agree with that other guy. If you say those are Kobe's rings and much as Shaq's then you clearly didn't watch. Saying that shaq would have won 100% 3 times without him is a little much. Lets be honest though, it probably would have happened. You talk about why penny and shaq didn't win. There was this guy named michael jordan, and this other team that had these guys named Hakeem the Dream and Clyde the Glide. They lost to Reggie Millers pacers his sophomore year. His 3rd year they beat reggie millers pacers and the jordanless bulls to lose to the Rockets in the finals. Shaq was injured much of 96 and returned to lead his team to the eastern finals where they got destroyed by jordans bulls. The next season he was traded to LA. Edit: In that 2004 finals you are referring to Kobe shot 38% while Shaq shot 63%. Ben Wallace did an excellent job guarding shaq and he still averaged 26.6 and 10.8. Ben Wallace is one of the greatest defenders and rebounders of all time. You talk so much about jordans team you should know that Dennis Rodman guarded someone of the best centers of all time and limited their numbers. | ||
|
c0ldfusion
United States8293 Posts
On June 07 2012 05:19 FreedomMurder wrote: You talk about why penny and shaq didn't win. There was this guy named michael jordan, and this other team that had these guys named Hakeem the Dream and Clyde the Glide. They lost to Reggie Millers pacers his sophomore year. His 3rd year they beat reggie millers pacers and the jordanless bulls to lose to the Rockets in the finals. lol, I remember those games and I rooted for Orlando. And I remember when Shaq won in L.A., I was thinking in the back of my mind that it felt cheap - that he was just facing less stacked competition. Also, Kobe and Jordan had the same coach.... | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
| ||
XaI)CyRiC
United States4471 Posts
On June 07 2012 05:19 FreedomMurder wrote: They aren't comparable I'm sorry. They just aren't. Kobe is forced, he wants to be Jordan he said it himself. He has the worst shot selection I've ever seen in my life. Kobe gets mad if another player on his team garners more attention than him just for a second. Jordan effected the game like nobody ever has. Averaging a higher field goal percentage, ppg, rpg, spg, blocks per game and less turnovers. In the playoffs the statistics become even more widespread. I agree with that other guy. If you say those are Kobe's rings and much as Shaq's then you clearly didn't watch. Saying that shaq would have won 100% 3 times without him is a little much. Lets be honest though, it probably would have happened. You talk about why penny and shaq didn't win. There was this guy named michael jordan, and this other team that had these guys named Hakeem the Dream and Clyde the Glide. They lost to Reggie Millers pacers his sophomore year. His 3rd year they beat reggie millers pacers and the jordanless bulls to lose to the Rockets in the finals. Shaq was injured much of 96 and returned to lead his team to the eastern finals where they got destroyed by jordans bulls. The next season he was traded to LA. Edit: In that 2004 finals you are referring to Kobe shot 38% while Shaq shot 63%. Ben Wallace did an excellent job guarding shaq and he still averaged 26.6 and 10.8. Ben Wallace is one of the greatest defenders and rebounders of all time. You talk so much about jordans team you should know that Dennis Rodman guarded someone of the best centers of all time and limited their numbers. It appears that we just don't agree, and that's fine. Personally, I think you're misusing the word comparable, but that's just nitpicking. I'm interseted to hear who you think is comparable to Jordan, because Kobe is the closest thing the NBA has had to him. Comparing Jordan to guys like Kareem, Russell or Wilt makes less sense than comparing him to Kobe as you just can't compare bigs vs wings in any meaningful way. No one else comes close to Jordan in terms of accomplishments as Kobe. Kobe is still the most complete player the NBA has seen skill-wise, and that includes Jordan. I also find it interesting that you don't think the two are at all comparable when people who played with and coached Jordan and Jordan himself have acknowledged that they are. You also seem to believe that Kobe is the only one of the two who was a difficult sociopathic teammate, but that was hardly the case (i.e. Jordan punching Kerr in practice). But, hey, your opinion is your opinion. Just realize that as much as Kobe has faults, Jordan was not infallible and was far from perfect himself as well. As for the Kobe/Shaq rings issue, you're putting words in my mouth. I never said that the rings were just as much Kobe's as they were Shaq's. I acknowledged that Shaq was the Batman to Kobe's Robin. However, that doesn't change the fact that Shaq needed Kobe to get those rings. People can theorize all they want about whether he would have been able to do so without Kobe, but the bottom line is that Shaq had no rings before Kobe, and has had no rings without him except for the single season he played with Wade (another HoF wing player). So while Shaq played a larger role in the Lakers threepeat, there's little to no evidence that he could have done it without Kobe. Again, it's not like Shaq was completely unstoppable and he made his teams undefeatable by himself. Fact is that, as dominant as Shaq was, he could not close out games because he couldn't shoot FTs, and he was not as unstoppable as you made him out to be in your initial post. Believe me, I watched him very closely as a Lakers fan over those seasons. I don't know what your point is in pointing out how great Ben Wallace was. Remember the context was that you were the one who was claiming that Shaq was unguardable and that it was inevitable he was going to win championships no matter who he was paired with. Wallace and the Pistons, among others, proved that wrong. You pointing out the competition that prevented Shaq from winning a ring pre-Kobe doesn't change the fact that your argument about it being inevitable that Shaq would win championships is refuted by the fact that he was defeated during his career, and almost defeated multiple times even with Kobe and Wade (two of the best players ever). The truth is that Shaq, just like Kobe (and Jordan), needed an elite level teammate and strong supporting cast to win his rings, which goes to my point that it's BS to criticize Kobe for that same thing. | ||
|
iKill[ShocK]
Vietnam3530 Posts
| ||
|
Holcan
Canada2593 Posts
On June 07 2012 06:12 iKill[ShocK] wrote: Hoping KG would get another ring here, probably his last year too. Probably the last year of his 3 year 60 million dollar contract.....Garnett has at least 3 more years in him, and probably more if he doesnt suffer an injury that slows him down. He is still one of the premier big men in the league. | ||
|
Durp
Canada3117 Posts
my previous post a few pages back was not well thought out, and frankly was just an anti-LBJ rant I can't take many of these posts seriously with how liberally people are throwing around "best of all time." I love D-wade, but to claim he's one of the best SG's ever is exceptionally premature. Consider Pete Marovich, Reggie Miller, Allen Iverson, MJ, Jerry West, Oscar Robertson, and the list goes on. Ben Wallace one of the best? He was an exceptionally good defensive player, but to say he's one of the best ever I feel is a bit of a stretch. What about Kareem? Hakeem? Wilt? Karl Malone? Rodman? I don't really think Wallace is on any of their levels given he's a similar, albeit worse version of Dennis Rodman. (though I love the guy, that afro was epic as fuck) Kobe's a polarizing figure, much like Lebron, but ultimately he's done way more. He's got the records and the championships to back that up. You can say what you will about Shaq/Gasol helping Kobe win his championships, but Lebron has zero with (as many have claimed) one of "the best SGs" playing with him. He's had teams built around him and still couldn't get it done and he's one game away from once again not getting it done. I for one feel like way too many new-generation players get "of all time" credit that they frankly don't deserve (they may one day, but it's way too early to throw those words around now) Kobe, like MJ, played with a tremendous supporting cast and won multiple championships. They also both played for the best coach in NBA history. Kobe's career numbers (which have more than a decade of consistency) scream that he's worth mentioning in the top players ever category, and that he's at least worth mentioning alongside Michael- though he's clearly not as good. While Lebron has put up unbelievable season numbers, he shies away from the big shot, and I vehemently believe that the true greats (MJ, Irving, Magic, Bird) all wanted the ball at the end of the game, because they knew they could win it. For the most part, Lebron has shown the opposite. He's a physical freak that by all rights should be controlling every game he's in, yet for some reason he can't get it done when it matters most. I for one believe that will be his legacy. As for Shaq, he was exceptionally dominant. Short of Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Shaq may have been the most dominant offensive player basketball has ever seen. Don't forget his career FT% is a woeful 50~%, a whole 20 percent lower than Kareem, yet he is 6th all-time scoring (and if you had him shoot the even same FT% as Kareem he'd be #3 all time and have more total points than MJ). I'm shocked how little credit he's being given by people. However with that all said, he became a tremendous liability at the end of games. If people remember the Hack-a-Shaq days, it got to points where in the final 2 minutes of games Shaq was subbed in/out for offensive and defensive possessions just so that he could not lose his team games at the free throw line (which is why imo he's not considered the best of all time). LBJ has been a regular season boss, and a playoff footnote. Until he gets beyond that, I don't think he deserves any consideration with the top players list above. Basketball's a team game- so no one player should ever be considered the winner/loser for their team- but, ultimately the true, true greats won with their teams (or in some cases in spite of them) /rant An addendum to this rant, which I think should be thrown into this discussion, is the one guy I think never gets enough credit- Allen Iverson. The dude wrecked shit for years, is a top 20 all time scorer, and was woefully undersized for his position. He took a beating every game, never shied away from big shots or driving to the hole, as was exceptionally clutch. I wish he'd won a championship so he'd get the credit I feel he deserves. edit; On June 07 2012 06:41 rei wrote: Neither michael jordon nor Kobe bryant is the geatest player of all time, all you have to do is open up the record book, the guy made all the records is the greatest player of all time. I'll save you guys time- Kareem. | ||
|
Erandorr
2283 Posts
On June 07 2012 06:32 Holcan wrote: Probably the last year of his 3 year 60 million dollar contract.....Garnett has at least 3 more years in him, and probably more if he doesnt suffer an injury that slows him down. He is still one of the premier big men in the league. KG playing Center makes me happy. Its really hard to say still, because at his age one injury can end his career very quickly | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16071 Posts
On June 07 2012 06:01 XaI)CyRiC wrote: It appears that we just don't agree, and that's fine. Personally, I think you're misusing the word comparable, but that's just nitpicking. I'm interseted to hear who you think is comparable to Jordan, because Kobe is the closest thing the NBA has had to him. Comparing Jordan to guys like Kareem, Russell or Wilt makes less sense than comparing him to Kobe as you just can't compare bigs vs wings in any meaningful way. No one else comes close to Jordan in terms of accomplishments as Kobe. Kobe is still the most complete player the NBA has seen skill-wise, and that includes Jordan. I also find it interesting that you don't think the two are at all comparable when people who played with and coached Jordan and Jordan himself have acknowledged that they are. You also seem to believe that Kobe is the only one of the two who was a difficult sociopathic teammate, but that was hardly the case (i.e. Jordan punching Kerr in practice). But, hey, your opinion is your opinion. Just realize that as much as Kobe has faults, Jordan was not infallible and was far from perfect himself as well. As for the Kobe/Shaq rings issue, you're putting words in my mouth. I never said that the rings were just as much Kobe's as they were Shaq's. I acknowledged that Shaq was the Batman to Kobe's Robin. However, that doesn't change the fact that Shaq needed Kobe to get those rings. People can theorize all they want about whether he would have been able to do so without Kobe, but the bottom line is that Shaq had no rings before Kobe, and has had no rings without him except for the single season he played with Wade (another HoF wing player). So while Shaq played a larger role in the Lakers threepeat, there's little to no evidence that he could have done it without Kobe. Again, it's not like Shaq was completely unstoppable and he made his teams undefeatable by himself. Fact is that, as dominant as Shaq was, he could not close out games because he couldn't shoot FTs, and he was not as unstoppable as you made him out to be in your initial post. Believe me, I watched him very closely as a Lakers fan over those seasons. I don't know what your point is in pointing out how great Ben Wallace was. Remember the context was that you were the one who was claiming that Shaq was unguardable and that it was inevitable he was going to win championships no matter who he was paired with. Wallace and the Pistons, among others, proved that wrong. You pointing out the competition that prevented Shaq from winning a ring pre-Kobe doesn't change the fact that your argument about it being inevitable that Shaq would win championships is refuted by the fact that he was defeated during his career, and almost defeated multiple times even with Kobe and Wade (two of the best players ever). The truth is that Shaq, just like Kobe (and Jordan), needed an elite level teammate and strong supporting cast to win his rings, which goes to my point that it's BS to criticize Kobe for that same thing. Pretty much this. | ||
|
rei
United States3594 Posts
| ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
|
ecstatica
United States542 Posts
Just ass-kissing Bron with no mention of the actual game. Nothing about swarming D from Celtics, nothing about clutch shots. Tip-off by Rondo OVER WADE and a hustle play on the floor by Ray to consciously set up an open 3 are suddenly lucky deflections that will never happen etc. Idiocy at its peak. Oh my GOD - Bron twisted his ankle! And still plays! He cant be human. Wtf is all this shit. Watch the game, admit you got 4-0ed in last 4. I dont get ppl that call these games ugly. Who make it ugly? Boston Celtics defense. I bet it wasnt that ugly vs Indiana? Cs swarm everyone, collapse on Bron and Wade drives, reach for passes. I say its beautiful. But if you want to see some highscores wait till Allen, Pierce, KG and Rondo all start hitting their shots. Then its a blowout. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16071 Posts
Basketball is a TEAM sport as much as the fans like the dwell on the ability of individual players you can't win without a good team. Can you point to a single championship team that had ONE great player? It takes a team of great players to win a title in this game. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16071 Posts
On June 07 2012 06:35 Durp wrote: + Show Spoiler + my previous post a few pages back was not well thought out, and frankly was just an anti-LBJ rant I can't take many of these posts seriously with how liberally people are throwing around "best of all time." I love D-wade, but to claim he's one of the best SG's ever is exceptionally premature. Consider Pete Marovich, Reggie Miller, Allen Iverson, MJ, Jerry West, Oscar Robertson, and the list goes on. Ben Wallace one of the best? He was an exceptionally good defensive player, but to say he's one of the best ever I feel is a bit of a stretch. What about Kareem? Hakeem? Wilt? Karl Malone? Rodman? I don't really think Wallace is on any of their levels given he's a similar, albeit worse version of Dennis Rodman. (though I love the guy, that afro was epic as fuck) Kobe's a polarizing figure, much like Lebron, but ultimately he's done way more. He's got the records and the championships to back that up. You can say what you will about Shaq/Gasol helping Kobe win his championships, but Lebron has zero with (as many have claimed) one of "the best SGs" playing with him. He's had teams built around him and still couldn't get it done and he's one game away from once again not getting it done. I for one feel like way too many new-generation players get "of all time" credit that they frankly don't deserve (they may one day, but it's way too early to throw those words around now) Kobe, like MJ, played with a tremendous supporting cast and won multiple championships. They also both played for the best coach in NBA history. Kobe's career numbers (which have more than a decade of consistency) scream that he's worth mentioning in the top players ever category, and that he's at least worth mentioning alongside Michael- though he's clearly not as good. While Lebron has put up unbelievable season numbers, he shies away from the big shot, and I vehemently believe that the true greats (MJ, Irving, Magic, Bird) all wanted the ball at the end of the game, because they knew they could win it. For the most part, Lebron has shown the opposite. He's a physical freak that by all rights should be controlling every game he's in, yet for some reason he can't get it done when it matters most. I for one believe that will be his legacy. As for Shaq, he was exceptionally dominant. Short of Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Shaq may have been the most dominant offensive player basketball has ever seen. Don't forget his career FT% is a woeful 50~%, a whole 20 percent lower than Kareem, yet he is 6th all-time scoring (and if you had him shoot the even same FT% as Kareem he'd be #3 all time and have more total points than MJ). I'm shocked how little credit he's being given by people. However with that all said, he became a tremendous liability at the end of games. If people remember the Hack-a-Shaq days, it got to points where in the final 2 minutes of games Shaq was subbed in/out for offensive and defensive possessions just so that he could not lose his team games at the free throw line (which is why imo he's not considered the best of all time). LBJ has been a regular season boss, and a playoff footnote. Until he gets beyond that, I don't think he deserves any consideration with the top players list above. Basketball's a team game- so no one player should ever be considered the winner/loser for their team- but, ultimately the true, true greats won with their teams (or in some cases in spite of them) /rant An addendum to this rant, which I think should be thrown into this discussion, is the one guy I think never gets enough credit- Allen Iverson. The dude wrecked shit for years, is a top 20 all time scorer, and was woefully undersized for his position. He took a beating every game, never shied away from big shots or driving to the hole, as was exceptionally clutch. I wish he'd won a championship so he'd get the credit I feel he deserves. edit; I'll save you guys time- Kareem. Unfortunately for Iverson he's a perfect example of a player whose twilight of his career ruined the legacy of his prime. A perfect counter-example is Kobe Bryant whose later part of his career is arguably more impressive than his earlier parts of his career since he has learned to lead teams, rely on skill over athleticism, and just continue to keep winning. I mean the dude has only missed the playoffs once in his entire career. All for the same franchise no less. Iverson on the other hand, has had his legacy tarnished by team swaps, off court drama, his practice speech, and poor results in international play. It's unfortunate, but that's the way it is. | ||
|
Malinor
Germany4727 Posts
On June 07 2012 07:17 Ace wrote: holy crap. Too much nonsense to even respond to. Good post though Xyric! The "dont even compare Jordan to Kobe" stuff is getting out of hand. On sheer basketball ability alone, Kobe is easily a top 10 talent and probably closer to top 5 if taking into account the era he played in. Wade/Lebron/Kobe are historically monster basketball players that won't be seen for a long time. That is a claim I always have so many problems with. Minus the possibility that "a long time" means something different to you then to me, what exactly make people think this way? There was Jordan in the 80s 90s, then came Kobe, then came Wade and LBJ shortly after, and now the line just stops?. This is also ignoring so many ballplayers in between (and mostly people that don't look so fancy taking it to the basket). Same in every other sport I can think of (Football: after Ronaldo came Zidane, then came Ronaldinho, and now we have C.Ronaldo and Messi scoring 50 goals a season. And before them came Pele, Maradonna, Beckenbauer, Cruyff and so on). In germany we say these people are a "Jahrhunderttalent", which literally means talent of a century. Yet there are several of them every decade. It seems we all have to use the imaginative superlative of a superlative to say that someone is good. This is probably one of the reasons people get offended over this. When their favourite play is named top10 of all time, they will ask "why not top5?". The truth is, the next Wade is just around the corner, whether it takes three years or five. Just a little rant about something that always bothers me. | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
|
XaI)CyRiC
United States4471 Posts
| ||
| ||
