Take your pick: Duncan or Kobe

[Jims_Doors]

and obtw, who is "we" again? oh yeah, you and Turnip. a pair of nobodies with a grand hate for Lakers fans. LMAO!!! it doesn't get ANY more pathetic than YOU two losers. no wonder "WE" think you're an asshole...

no doubt about it, the two of you clowns need a laugh track to accompany all your posts...

Cool story, brah.

Tell us why you think LeBron should have chosen MJ as the best player in the league over the last 15yrs.

 

[Black Adam]

tsk, i'm sure you had something interesting to say there, door prize. but as it turns out, you're on my ignore list. so unless someone ELSE posts whatever you have to say i'm afraid i can't enjoy your scintillating remarks. but let the thought of me thinking you're a total asshat keep ya warm for the evening...

 

[Jims_Doors]

Cool story, brah.

Tell us why you think LeBron should have chosen MJ as the best player in the league over the last 15yrs

 

[OutlawImmortal]

He said the last 15 years because MJ retired 15 years ago. He came back with the Wiz but I don't think he was expecting to win titles anymore.

 

[Black Adam]

He said the last 15 years because MJ retired 15 years ago. He came back with the Wiz but I don't think he was expecting to win titles anymore.

sheesh...

 

[HizzleRocker]

I say this with all due respect to Tim Duncan...

And I do mean that. Duncan has been a class act, and has been good for the NBA. He is one of the top 3 power forwards of all time imo (probably top 2).

However - this one goes to Kobe. I do think it is a worthy discussion, so am not going to say its easy. Anyone who claims this is an easy debate is either extremely biased or does not know basketball.

Duncan is still chasing Kobe in rings.

Duncan never scored 81.

Duncan never outscored the Mavericks 62 to 61 by himself through 3 quarters.

Duncan blew it for the US in 2004; Kobe brought home the Gold in 2008 and was the leader.

Duncan never scored 40 in 9 straight games or 50 in 4.

Kobe has more clutch game winners than any player in the modern era.

Kobe Bryant vs. Tim Duncan: Who Has Had the More Impressive Career? | Bleacher Report

Advantage Kobe.

 

[Jims_Doors]

He said the last 15 years because MJ retired 15 years ago. He came back with the Wiz but I don't think he was expecting to win titles anymore.

James was asked "Who you think was the most dominant susperstar over the last 15yrs." Meaning who has played over the last 15 that has been the most dominant.

MJ isn't even in the conversation because he doesn't fit the criteria.

CL thought James didn't say MJ because MJ made some recent remarks about LeBron's play.

That's why I asked him "what does MJ have to do with who's played over the last 15yrs?"

As usual, when CL looks like a dumbass after posting something, he dodges the questions when called out. Same shit, different site.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

James was asked "Who you think was the most dominant susperstar over the last 15yrs." Meaning who has played over the last 15 that has been the most dominant.

MJ isn't even in the conversation because he doesn't fit the criteria.

CL thought James didn't say MJ because MJ made some recent remarks about LeBron's play.

That's why I asked him "what does MJ have to do with who's played over the last 15yrs?"

As usual, when CL looks like a dumbass after posting something, he dodges the questions when called out. Same shit, different site.

The clown has shown time and time again that he simply has no reading comprehension.
Remember his preseason power rankings post .
Once his ignorance was exposed, he tried to say it was a " gag".

 

[Hornsstampede2.0]

You can look at Kobe's seasons without Shaq or Gasol.
He mysteriously became a forgotten player on a mediocre to bad team.

He tended to win when he had an all-NBA big man that season (shaq 00,01,02 and Gasol 09,10).

He either missed the playoffs entirely.....
Or, he had 45 win seasons and first round quick exits without all-NBA big man.

There is no coincidence that Kobe did not lead his team in Win Shares in 00,01,02,09,10.

That is the measure of a player's direct impact to generate wins.
Essentially, Shaq and Gasol were more important to actual win generating in 00,01,02,09, and 10.

 

[trojanfan12]

You can look at Kobe's seasons without Shaq or Gasol.
He mysteriously became a forgotten player on a mediocre to bad team.

He tended to win when he had an all-NBA big man that season (shaq 00,01,02 and Gasol 09,10).

He either missed the playoffs entirely.....
Or, he had 45 win seasons and first round quick exits without all-NBA big man.

There is no coincidence that Kobe did not lead his team in Win Shares in 00,01,02,09,10.

That is the measure of a player's direct impact to generate wins.
Essentially, Shaq and Gasol were more important to actual win generating in 00,01,02,09, and 10.

All of which means absolutely nothing!! After all, how many rings have Shaq and Gasol won without an all-NBA 2 guard? How many titles has Duncan won without Robinson, Parker and Ginobili?

So, no Shaq and Gasol were not any more important to actual win generating than Kobe. Each was just as important as the other.

It is a team sport after all!!

 

[Sman2011]

Duncan is a center not a power forward. ...Here are all the centers better then duncan. Kareem, Shaq, Hakeem, Ewing, Moses Malone, Wilt, Jabbar, Russell...

Duncan tries to pretend he's a power forward because he knows he doesn't measure up to those other guys. Bottom line they're all pretty much the same height or within an inch or two.

But I'll give Duncan credit, he is a top 10 center of all time.

 

[Hornsstampede2.0]

It is tough to quantify, but this is an argument regarding two very close players.

Duncan's main argument is that he was the best player on his team every year in his prime.

Kobe was not the best player on his team from 97-04.

Win Shares does a pretty good job to support that assertion.

It takes in account both offensive and defensive production to determine how many of a teams wins that player was likely responsible for individually.

You take the total team wins and decide who won how many wins of the total number.

Kobe was 2nd in win shares all 5 title seasons,
He was 2nd in playoff win shares in 3 of the 5 title seasons. He performed better in 01 and 09.

Duncan was 1st in win shares all 4 title seasons.
He was 1st in playoff win shares all 4 title seasons.

 

[trojanfan12]

It is tough to quantify, but this is an argument regarding two very close players.

Duncan's main argument is that he was the best player on his team every year in his prime.

Kobe was not the best player on his team from 97-04.

Win Shares does a pretty good job to support that assertion.

It takes in account both offensive and defensive production to determine how many of a teams wins that player was likely responsible for individually.

You take the total team wins and decide who won how many wins of the total number.

Kobe was 2nd in win shares all 5 title seasons,
He was 2nd in playoff win shares in 3 of the 5 title seasons. He performed better in 01 and 09.

Duncan was 1st in win shares all 4 title seasons.
He was 1st in playoff win shares all 4 title seasons.

I get your point, but all of this additional statistical analysis doesn't mean much, imo!! The one thing we know about stats is that can all be twisted and/or changed to support or refute any argument. It's just a matter of how they are input, presented and what is used.

Bottom line to me is this:

Shaq, with Kobe or D-Wade has 4 rings. Without them, he has zero!!

Kobe, with Shaq or Gasol has 5 rings. Without them, he has zero!!

Duncan, with Robinson, Parker and Ginobili has 4 rings (hopefully 5 in a week or so). Without them, he has zero!!

As I said, team sport!!

 

[rmilia1]

You can look at Kobe's seasons without Shaq or Gasol.
He mysteriously became a forgotten player on a mediocre to bad team.

He tended to win when he had an all-NBA big man that season (shaq 00,01,02 and Gasol 09,10).

He either missed the playoffs entirely.....
Or, he had 45 win seasons and first round quick exits without all-NBA big man.

There is no coincidence that Kobe did not lead his team in Win Shares in 00,01,02,09,10.

That is the measure of a player's direct impact to generate wins.
Essentially, Shaq and Gasol were more important to actual win generating in 00,01,02,09, and 10.

Sorry Horns but this is the lamest argument people make about ANY NBA superstar. There has NEVER been a team where 1 guy won a title by himself. Every title team has had multiple stars. MJ never won without Pippen, Bord never won without Parrish and McHale, Dirk didnt win til he got Kidd, Wade didnt win til he got Shaq. The closest thing we have ever had to a 1 man show winning a title was when LBJ made the Finals in 07 ( which also tells you how great he was even back then). Its extremely rare for teams with only 1 legit star to even MAKE a finals and they NEVER win a title. The only team I can think of in my lifetime to win a title with no true stars was Detroit in 04 and that team had 3 or 4 really good guys all in their prime.

 

[Hornsstampede2.0]

Sorry Horns but this is the lamest argument people make about ANY NBA superstar. There has NEVER been a team where 1 guy won a title by himself. Every title team has had multiple stars. MJ never won without Pippen, Bord never won without Parrish and McHale, Dirk didnt win til he got Kidd, Wade didnt win til he got Shaq. The closest thing we have ever had to a 1 man show winning a title was when LBJ made the Finals in 07 ( which also tells you how great he was even back then). Its extremely rare for teams with only 1 legit star to even MAKE a finals and they NEVER win a title. The only team I can think of in my lifetime to win a title with no true stars was Detroit in 04 and that team had 3 or 4 really good guys all in their prime.

I never said anyone won a title by themselves.

I asserted that the biggest knock on KOBE is that he was not the best player on his team from 1997-2004.

...............

And Duncan did win in 2003 without a single star on his team besides himself.
Duncan's 2003 campaign was the closest thing to a one man show since 1994 Akeem.

Some guys later became stars, but it would be like suggesting Rajon Rondo in 2007 was a star for the 2007 Celts....or looking at the 2006 version of Andrew Bynum and telling us Kobe had an allstar big in 2006.....or saying Paul George was an allstar for the 2010 Pacers.

 

[rmilia1]

I never said anyone won a title by themselves.

I asserted that the biggest knock on KOBE is that he was not the best player on his team from 1997-2004.

...............

And Duncan did win in 2003 without a single star on his team besides himself.
Duncan's 2003 campaign was the closest thing to a one man show since 1994 Akeem.

Some guys later became stars, but it would be like suggesting Rajon Rondo in 2007 was a star for the 2007 Celts....or looking at the 2006 version of Andrew Bynum and telling us Kobe had an allstar big in 2006.....or saying Paul George was an allstar for the 2010 Pacers.

Kind of true about Timmy I suppose although Parker averaged 16 and 6 and the Spurs had a great D that year led by Bruce Bowen but I suppose you could say that Duncan was the only superstar on that team.

 

[Sman2011]

I never said anyone won a title by themselves.

I asserted that the biggest knock on KOBE is that he was not the best player on his team from 1997-2004.

...............

And Duncan did win in 2003 without a single star on his team besides himself.
Duncan's 2003 campaign was the closest thing to a one man show since 1994 Akeem.

Some guys later became stars, but it would be like suggesting Rajon Rondo in 2007 was a star for the 2007 Celts....or looking at the 2006 version of Andrew Bynum and telling us Kobe had an allstar big in 2006.....or saying Paul George was an allstar for the 2010 Pacers.

I think Horns, that you're trying to say it's YOUR argument for the biggest knock against Kobe....

A pretty dumb one at that. First of all, Kobe was probably a better player than Shaq in 2002-2004...For example Kobe averaged 30 pts, 6.9 rebs, 5.9 assists in 2002-2003...First teamm all nba,first team all defense....But regardless.

Secondly, are you suggesting if Duncan played with Shaq, duncan would've been the best player on the team? I think everyone agrees no, since Shaq was definitely better than Duncan.

So your point is really a weak one....And there's very little support out there for your argument of Duncan being better than Kobe.

This is not to take anything away from Duncan. Tim is/was a very fundamentally sound player. A very consistent player who you could count on for 20 pts and 10 rebs a game. However, that's it. He never had remarkable years where he scored 30 plus or grabbed 15 rebs..

Duncan is a nice solid player. I consider Duncan one of the 10 best centers to ever play. Perhaps 7 or 8...

That's not bad.

 

[MJ23]

Duncan is not better than Kobe. Duncan failed to win two titles in a row 4 times.

 

[MJ23]

Yeah, than the year 2003-04 he only avg. 24 ppg.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

Kobe Bryant will be the big loser as LeBron James or Tim Duncan enhances his legacy in NBA Finals. - NBA News | FOX Sports on MSN