Michael Jordan is a hypocrite

[Shaqdaddy11]

A lot of stupid people must have voted in that poll.

Yes, tens of thousands of people are stupid and you are correct.

 

[knowyourenemy]

Your opinion

We can just use facts if you want and the only objective evidence that will support your opinion will be "5 rings."

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

We can just use facts if you want and the only objective evidence that will support your opinion will be "5 rings."

What do NBA players aim for in the league? MVPs or championships?

 

[knowyourenemy]

What do NBA players aim for in the league? MVPs or championships?

So you admit that you've got nothing other than the old "5 rings" argument?

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

So you admit that you've got nothing other than the old "5 rings" argument?

I'm not even saying that Kobe is better. I have lebron as the better player too, albeit only just.

The point I was trying to bring across, before you got your panties in a bunch, was that popularity eventually dictates who is known to be the better player.

 

[knowyourenemy]

I'm not even saying that Kobe is better. I have lebron as the better player too, albeit only just.

The point I was trying to bring across, before you got your panties in a bunch, was that popularity eventually dictates who is known to be the better player.

Well, I agree that popularity players a big role, but not the only role. If we want to have a meaningful discussion about how good a player actually is/was, we need to cast aside personal biases. Case in point, I loved Allen Iverson but I think he gets severely overrated by Philly fans. I also liked Kobe -- but I think he gets overrated by Lakers fans. Because those guys have styles that appeal to fans (both personal style and playing style), I think they end up being ranked a little higher than they probably should be. For the record -- I'm not trying to put Iverson in the same category as Kobe, just that they both benefit from fan popularity.

Also for the record, my panties are perfectly unbunched.

 

[tlance]

I'm not even saying that Kobe is better. I have lebron as the better player too, albeit only just.

The point I was trying to bring across, before you got your panties in a bunch, was that popularity eventually dictates who is known to be the better player.

No.

Popularity dictates who casual fans choose in a poll like the one you linked. People in the know don't care about popularity. That is why generic polls on a big site like ESPN are meaningless.

Now, if it were a poll of current NBA players or NBA analysts, then it would mean something.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

Now, if it were a poll of current NBA players or NBA analysts, then it would mean something.

And how many have openly spoken about the lebron v kobe discussion?

 

[tlance]

And how many have openly spoken about the lebron v kobe discussion?

Players?

Not many. Analysts? It is what they do. I am fairly certain it would be a landslide if guys like Billups, McGrady, Smith, Shaq, Barkley, etc. were polled on this topic. Barkley might take Kobe out of loyalty to Jordan, but most are taking LeBron.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

Players?

Not many. Analysts? It is what they do. I am fairly certain it would be a landslide if guys like Billups, McGrady, Smith, Shaq, Barkley, etc. were polled on this topic. Barkley might take Kobe out of loyalty to Jordan, but most are taking LeBron.

So you agree with everything Stephen A has to say because he's an analyst?

Every single thing said on First Take is right on the money?

 

[knowyourenemy]

Players?

Not many. Analysts? It is what they do. I am fairly certain it would be a landslide if guys like Billups, McGrady, Smith, Shaq, Barkley, etc. were polled on this topic. Barkley might take Kobe out of loyalty to Jordan, but most are taking LeBron.

Barkley said this not too long ago:

"I have told you guys the five greatest players in my opinion: Michael [Jordan], Oscar Robertson, Wilt [Chamberlain], Bill Russell and Kareem [Abdul-Jabbar]. Then it’s Kobe Bryant and Tim Duncan. Then LeBron is right there. I don’t understand why ya’ll are in such a hurry to move him past Tim Duncan and Kobe. Now if he wins a couple of more championships, I might move him past Kobe and Tim Duncan. You guys always talk about championships. Kobe and Tim have five. LeBron has three…LeBron is amazing. But only in the bulls--- of today’s society could I say a guy is one of the eight greatest players ever and it's an insult to him. That’s crazy. If LeBron wins a couple of more championships I will move him past Tim Duncan and Kobe."

Charles Barkley: Always The Life Of the Party

 

[CitySushi]

Here's the thing for me about the 5 - 3 argument for rings.

Kobe wasn't even the best player on his team for 3 of his rings. Shaq was clearly the dominant and best player. He won the MVP's in all 3 of their championships. Every year that Lebron has been in the finals, he's been the best player on the court by a pretty significant margin.

Lastly, comparing Kobe and Lebron is comparing apples and oranges. It would be better to compare Lebron to Magic/Oscar and Kobe to Jordan. Cross comparing them doesn't work because their skill sets are entirely different.

 

[tlance]

So you agree with everything Stephen A has to say because he's an analyst?

Every single thing said on First Take is right on the money?

Kenny Smith.

Stephen A isn't an analyst. He is a talking head fool.

 

[tlance]

So you agree with everything Stephen A has to say because he's an analyst?

Every single thing said on First Take is right on the money?

ANd I never said I agree with everything those guys say. But I do respect their opinions.

Stephen A. And many of the other journalists on the ESPN talk shows don't know jack about basketball. They are just loud.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

ANd I never said I agree with everything those guys say. But I do respect their opinions.

Stephen A. And many of the other journalists on the ESPN talk shows don't know jack about basketball. They are just loud.

So Stephen A doesn't know shit, despite it being his job, but a couple of guys and gals on a random internet message board do?

Every single thing about basketball, apart from actual results (including stats), is a mere opinion.

 

[Wamu]

ANd I never said I agree with everything those guys say. But I do respect their opinions.

Stephen A. And many of the other journalists on the ESPN talk shows don't know jack about basketball. They are just loud.

 

[tlance]

So Stephen A doesn't know shit, despite it being his job, but a couple of guys and gals on a random internet message board do?

Every single thing about basketball, apart from actual results (including stats), is a mere opinion.

Stephen A knows sports in general. But he doesn't know basketball as well as some on here. That is fact.

 

[shopson67]

Here's the thing for me about the 5 - 3 argument for rings.

Kobe wasn't even the best player on his team for 3 of his rings. Shaq was clearly the dominant and best player. He won the MVP's in all 3 of their championships. Every year that Lebron has been in the finals, he's been the best player on the court by a pretty significant margin.

Lastly, comparing Kobe and Lebron is comparing apples and oranges. It would be better to compare Lebron to Magic/Oscar and Kobe to Jordan. Cross comparing them doesn't work because their skill sets are entirely different.

That 3rd ring with Shaq was pretty equal IMO. What does that matter though? Lebron never played with someone as effective as prime Shaq, but did Kobe ever have a 2nd teammate as good as prime Wade or prime Bosh? Maybe Gasol?

Kobe and Lebron are comparable, skills wise. Kobe has the killer drive, and Lebron has the physicality edge. Kobe, especially post Shaq, won with less and with the outcome resting on his shoulders. Kobe's two losses were to a very strong Celtics (proto-super) team and a hard-working Pistons team that caught the Lakers as they lost their cohesiveness. Lebron has been there more (advantage), but has lost more as well, including to the worst championship team in recent memory (Mavs). When splitting hairs, MVPs and ring counts come into play. They split those advantages as well. Rings are real though (especially for the main impact players), and MVPs are voted on (popularity contest). Both Kobe and Lebron should have more MVPs than they do, but voters hold grudges and get bored easily.

 

[tlance]

That 3rd ring with Shaq was pretty equal IMO. What does that matter though? Lebron never played with someone as effective as prime Shaq, but did Kobe ever have a 2nd teammate as good as prime Wade or prime Bosh? Maybe Gasol?

Kobe and Lebron are comparable, skills wise. Kobe has the killer drive, and Lebron has the physicality edge. Kobe, especially post Shaq, won with less and with the outcome resting on his shoulders. Kobe's two losses were to a very strong Celtics (proto-super) team and a hard-working Pistons team that caught the Lakers as they lost their cohesiveness. Lebron has been there more (advantage), but has lost more as well, including to the worst championship team in recent memory (Mavs). When splitting hairs, MVPs and ring counts come into play. They split those advantages as well. Rings are real though (especially for the main impact players), and MVPs are voted on (popularity contest). Both Kobe and Lebron should have more MVPs than they do, but voters hold grudges and get bored easily.

The Mavs were the worst championship team in recent memory, but still far better than the teams Kobe beat to get his first 3. They might even have been better than those Pistons.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

Stephen A knows sports in general. But he doesn't know basketball as well as some on here. That is fact.