On May 07 2010 13:44 Xeris wrote: I don't think its LeBron that is delusional - it really is the media machine. They think that because he's the best athlete BY FAR, that he is the best player. You can say what you want about Kobe winning titles with Shaq, but he always rose to the occasion in big games when it mattered. LeBron has continuously failed to deliver (except for 2 heroic playoff performances) in crucial moments. In his 7th year in the NBA he has yet to win a title, getting to the finals in a terrible east and getting demolished doesn't really count for anything. When is he going to win one?
The media has crowned him the "King" (the BEST player) for 2 years now, almost 3... at what point do they say.. "hey maybe something's wrong when the best player in the league keeps failing to deliver" . O_O!
The problem was he was fun to watch before that Finals run, then it seems like he was buying into his own hype. Like he knows the media will give him a pass (or 10), so he'll just act like it which is kind of sad, I like his game, but I really can't cheer for the guy.
For all the people saying Lebron is the best athlete/player right now in the NBA, that's fine and pretty accurate, but eventually you're going to have the "to never win a championship" added. The only problem is that the media already puts LBJ as winning a championship eventually, but do you really want to pull a Wilt with someone of his skill level?
He's basically carrying a scrub .500 team to a possible NBA Championship and all you can focus on is the negative crap?
Put your Laker fanboyism away for 2 secs and just enjoy the man's game. Yeah he may be cocky, but if anyone deserves to be it's him. Could you imagine the damage he'd do if he had a team like the Celts/Lakers/Magic/even the Suns around him?
I know it hurts that Kobe isn't the best player in the NBA anymore, but it's time to move on. LBJ being MVP doesn't make Kobe any less of a player, so just sit back and enjoy the fun!
On May 08 2010 01:14 RowdierBob wrote: Amazing how much hate you guys give LeBron..
He's basically carrying a scrub .500 team to a possible NBA Championship and all you can focus on is the negative crap?
Put your Laker fanboyism away for 2 secs and just enjoy the man's game. Yeah he may be cocky, but if anyone deserves to be it's him. Could you imagine the damage he'd do if he had a team like the Celts/Lakers/Magic/even the Suns around him?
I know it hurts that Kobe isn't the best player in the NBA anymore, but it's time to move on. LBJ being MVP doesn't make Kobe any less of a player, so just sit back and enjoy the fun!
its impossible for him to get teammates like that, since there is something called a salary cap, which means he is going to be the only good player on a medium level team.
and LBJ takes player of the league from Bryant for 5 days, until being upended by Kevin Durant, and returned to its rightful owner of Bryant.
On May 08 2010 01:41 RowdierBob wrote: Yeah except LeBron is on less than Kobe in the cap?
Are you kidding, Clevland has the 4th highest salary cap in the NBA (new york shouldn't count). WTF are you talking about sub 500 team?
- Mo Williams is a good player, Delonte West is good, Antawn Jamison is really good, Varajao is really good, Shaq is good, Hickson is up and coming, Booby Gibson is a streaky bench shooter,
The Cavs have a really fuckin good team. Sure he led one shitty team (2007 Cavs) to the finals - but from 2008 onwards the Cavs have been good. You don't get to see it because LeBron dominates the offense so completely, why do you think he gets the stats he does? He pretty much runs the point to initiate the offense then plays the forward position if he can't create something that's how he gets a lot of assists. He gets rebounds because he's fucking insanely athletic.
This is why I think his stats are incredibly misleading.
It has nothing to do with Lakers fanboyism. LeBron isn't the best, and until he actually wins something substantial there is no evidence to prove that he's better than everyone besides the numbers he puts up. And if you want to judge the best players by statistics alone, you're dumb as shit.
The only objective measure we've had of who is the best player came in the 2008 Olympics, and it sure as hell wasn't LeBron.
xeris is exactly right. everyone wants to point out that lebron's team is shitty when in fact he has a really good cast. They dont get the stats because lebron likes to run the game. a sub par team would be the thunder without durant.
why do you say lebron is the best? cuz of his stats? 50% shooting from lay ups and dunks? chase down blocks? jumps really high and slams it hard? cool. why not say dwight is the best then. he shoots 60%. all ya gotta do is throw the ball up and he'll rock it home, scores more efficiently than lebron. not to mention he'll get the opponent's entire team into foul trouble!
i recognize that he is a great player but i cant call a guy who runs over people the best player. in 5 years he won't be able to play like that anymore. so no more double/triple teams = no more assists.
Bill Simmons wrote about Steve Kerr's "bizarre" journey in becoming most-reviled-GM to hero. As someone who appreciates the management side of sports more than the actual sport itself, I thought it was a cool thing to look back on.
hate more seriously, it's a fact that lebron is the best player in the nba. it's stunning that people still think kobe is the best, do you watch basketball at all?
Im glad someone pointed this out... I think Ive known this rule since Allen Iverson started doing that lil jump stop shot.... of course its legal... when you land on both of your feet thats barely ur second step so wtf is people trippin on?
Lebron is the best player in the NBA duh, look at his fucking size and talent and numbers... Kobe is still more clutch of course cuz he got more experience and reminds me a lil of MJ, I've always called Kobe "NeoMJ"
But on a side note, I remember when I used to be annoying about the Jazz ... and saying gogogo jazz and just being a fanboy but all I was really doing was being a retard on purpose cuz I know everyone hates Utah and I was trying to be annoying on purpose but Lakers fanboys are so annoying specially you Xeris, the media has always been like that in any sport i.e Soccer, Football, Baseball, Basketball, etc. Every generation we have a player the media hypes up wayy toooo much and right now it isnt Kobes time, even though he's still under the medias radar alot too...
I hate Lakers Fan, they are so annoying to argue with... we all know Lakers are the best okay? I mean it, we really know it
On May 08 2010 05:05 InfeSteD wrote: I hate comparing players when it comes to winning titles and such because then again this is a 5 v 5 sport right?
In all honesty, who do you think would win IF? Lebron was in the lakers and Kobe was in the Cavs and they played in the finals?
let alone being coached by the greatest?
I would put my money on LeBron and the Lakers in 6.
That being said, I don't think it's as easy a call as it seems on paper. Would LeBron stick with the triangle offense? How quickly will he pick it up? And if they move away from the triangle, how will that affect Gasol and Bynum's productivity? Gasol has never seemed as efficient as when he was plugged into Jackson's system, and Bynum has been groomed to play in the offense since he was drafted. LeBron also brings up the question of where to put Artest although that may be more of a minor problem.
Strange as this sounds, I feel like Kobe would have an easier time fitting in with the Cavs' "give-it-to-your-superstar" offense than LeBron picking up the triangle (and that's considering the awkward reunion with Shaq). Still, LeBron and the Lakers would have way too much talent for me to pick against them =/
On May 08 2010 05:05 InfeSteD wrote: I hate comparing players when it comes to winning titles and such because then again this is a 5 v 5 sport right?
In all honesty, who do you think would win IF? Lebron was in the lakers and Kobe was in the Cavs and they played in the finals?
let alone being coached by the greatest?
probably neither would win. if lebron was on the lakers, who's gonna stop the guards of the other teams? i think cleveland has a better total defense than the lakers not to mention better shooters (more accurate and quicker releases) too. considering lebron doesnt play in the post i cant see the offense opening for the lakers' shooters. kobe already gives them 3-5 secs to the open shot but clang!
On May 08 2010 05:05 InfeSteD wrote: I hate comparing players when it comes to winning titles and such because then again this is a 5 v 5 sport right?
In all honesty, who do you think would win IF? Lebron was in the lakers and Kobe was in the Cavs and they played in the finals?
let alone being coached by the greatest?
Stop regurgitating this "5on5" nonsense. Basketball is the team sport where the individual has the most impact on a game. Tim Duncan won 4 titles without a single teammate being on an All-NBA team, and only one guy being an All-NBA defensive team member. Houston went back-to-back with Hakeem and a bunch of role players ('95 Drexler was a shadow of his Portland self). Kobe wasn't quite a star yet during the first Laker title run, and Shaq rampaged through the playoffs flanked by a fledgling Bryant and a washed up Glen Rice.
I know Utah had a pair of losers crumble in the playoffs for 20 straight years with average supporting casts, but that doesn't mean the other 29 teams have to be held to the same standard.
On May 08 2010 02:00 Xeris wrote: The only objective measure we've had of who is the best player came in the 2008 Olympics, and it sure as hell wasn't LeBron.
? lebron straight up raped in the olympics. kobe sucked.
kobe basically got extremely lucky that he came to the lakers at the same time as PJ and Shaq. then he got Gasol, Bynum, Ariza and PJ. the laker's triangle operates w/ or without kobe (as seen w/ their success without him). the cavs offense is dependent on lebron, who even acts as a facilitator.
do you really think if lebron was drafted onto the 2000 lakers they wouldn't have won like 6 titles?
it's not a fair comparison. kobe has had two championship caliber teams handed to him (with PJ as coach -- can't underestimate this), and happened to land on probably the greatest basketball franchise in history.
lebron was so good that he couldn't avoid being drafted onto a bad team.
anyone who thinks kobe is even close to lebron is delusional.
On May 08 2010 05:05 InfeSteD wrote: I hate comparing players when it comes to winning titles and such because then again this is a 5 v 5 sport right?
In all honesty, who do you think would win IF? Lebron was in the lakers and Kobe was in the Cavs and they played in the finals?
let alone being coached by the greatest?
Stop regurgitating this "5on5" nonsense. Basketball is the team sport where the individual has the most impact on a game. Tim Duncan won 4 titles without a single teammate being on an All-NBA team, and only one guy being an All-NBA defensive team member. Houston went back-to-back with Hakeem and a bunch of role players ('95 Drexler was a shadow of his Portland self). Kobe wasn't quite a star yet during the first Laker title run, and Shaq rampaged through the playoffs flanked by a fledgling Bryant and a washed up Glen Rice.
I know Utah had a pair of losers crumble in the playoffs for 20 straight years with average supporting casts, but that doesn't mean the other 29 teams have to be held to the same standard.
Exactly, individuals have the most impact. That being said, when Kobe isnt playing good, you have a ton of other players that can step up and have a huge impact... it still matter what other players you have on the court...
When Dwight isnt there 100% Nelson or Lewis step up and bring u back to life... When Pierce isnt there 100% Rondo, Allen, Garnet, etc step up or vise versa...
and it goes along the same lines with the Cavs... Mo WIlliams carries them sometimes but sometimes it isnt just enough ....
You aint gonnna bullshit me saying team play dont matter....
Make7upyours brought up a good point I didnt think about which is who would fit in whose system...
shmay i think you better go research how Kobe ended up on the lakers, it has very little to do with luck. His draft class was also the second best draft talent wise, in NBA history, so ya, please stop needlessly talking shit.
On May 08 2010 02:00 Xeris wrote: The only objective measure we've had of who is the best player came in the 2008 Olympics, and it sure as hell wasn't LeBron.
? lebron straight up raped in the olympics. kobe sucked.
.
What the fuck? Gold medal game - who dominated the 4th quarter when the team needed it? Kobe.
On May 08 2010 05:05 InfeSteD wrote: I hate comparing players when it comes to winning titles and such because then again this is a 5 v 5 sport right?
In all honesty, who do you think would win IF? Lebron was in the lakers and Kobe was in the Cavs and they played in the finals?
let alone being coached by the greatest?
Actually, I think the best fit for the lakers isn't Kobe or Lebron, it would be an uber point guard like Nash/Williams/Paul (sorry Rondo, Lakers need outside shooting).
When people say the Lakers are a bad matchup for the Jazz or whoever, it's not because Kobe's stopping dribble penetrations and dominating the paint. If the Thunder or Jazz could score like normal inside the paint, the series would have been much different, regardless of whether Kobe averages 40 points. We've seen the lakers with a dominant Kobe and mediocre bigs in 2005, 2006, and part of 2007, and it wasn't impressive.
On May 08 2010 05:05 InfeSteD wrote: I hate comparing players when it comes to winning titles and such because then again this is a 5 v 5 sport right?
In all honesty, who do you think would win IF? Lebron was in the lakers and Kobe was in the Cavs and they played in the finals?
let alone being coached by the greatest?
Stop regurgitating this "5on5" nonsense. Basketball is the team sport where the individual has the most impact on a game. Tim Duncan won 4 titles without a single teammate being on an All-NBA team, and only one guy being an All-NBA defensive team member. Houston went back-to-back with Hakeem and a bunch of role players ('95 Drexler was a shadow of his Portland self). Kobe wasn't quite a star yet during the first Laker title run, and Shaq rampaged through the playoffs flanked by a fledgling Bryant and a washed up Glen Rice.
I know Utah had a pair of losers crumble in the playoffs for 20 straight years with average supporting casts, but that doesn't mean the other 29 teams have to be held to the same standard.
I wouldn't pick the spurs as your example of an individual having the most impact. If ever there was a team that would be used as an example of "team first" and a system being in place to make the team most successful rather than just being run by an individual, it would be the spurs. Each player has a role, and they do it well and don't try to be a star. Duncan on another crappy team would NOT have the same success as the spurs. The spurs win because they are a team first.
Your point my be correct, but not about the spurs at all.
On May 08 2010 02:00 Xeris wrote: The only objective measure we've had of who is the best player came in the 2008 Olympics, and it sure as hell wasn't LeBron.
? lebron straight up raped in the olympics. kobe sucked.
.
What the fuck? Gold medal game - who dominated the 4th quarter when the team needed it? Kobe.
did you even watch that game? lol ~_~
It was Wade who dominated the Olympics. Kobe got credit for doing great in the gold medal game but it was exaggerated greatly. No one seems to remember how kobe couldn't stop rudy fernandez in that game. Wade was by far and away the mvp of the olympics for the us
EPT
