Wait, what?
Talented team? Are referring to the 2001-02 team whose third-best player was Chris Whitney? Or the 2002-03 "powerhouse" trio of Jordan, Stackhouse and Hughes? They had talent?
When your third-best player is Chris F. Whitney, you don't deserve to go to the playoffs, I'm sorry.
My hatred for Kobe? ROFLMAO. I don't hate him, I don't like him but I don't hate him. I am NOT discounting his accomplishments, but I fail to see how a few regular season games put him above guys who have more rings and LEAD their teams. Jordan has finals MVPs. Show me Kobe's finals MVPs. He doesn't have nearly as many as Jordan, hell I don't think he even has ONE.
Kobe fans are rediculous. You guys actually think Kobe>Jordan? The GOAT? WTF?
LOL, but then comfortably some guys say that Lamar Odom and Walton are all stars.
Second to whom? Because I can think of at least three guys off the top of my head that I'd rate ahead of Kobe Bryant.*Kobe is amazing. At worst, he is the 2nd best guard to ever play the game. And that's saying something.
Odom and Walton are not, in fact, all-stars. Odom, however, is still better than probably eighty percent of the players that Jordan played with in Chicago, and EVERY player that he ever played with in Washington. I'd take Odom over Hamilton, Stackhouse or Hughes. Hell, I'd take Odom over any TWO of those guys.
Yeah, but I didn't say that he necessarily played with them at the same time... As it happens, he did, but that's neither here nor there...Ok, that means atleast two other players in chicago were better than odom. You got that math![]()
You think Kobe is better than Magic?Second to MJ of course. I also think that these comparisons with old school players are a little silly. I'm not saying that someone like West would not be one of the better guards today. But players like Kobe, MJ, Wade, McGrade are monsters physically and I don't think that the old school players guards could really be compared to them.
Big men story is a little bit different.
You think Kobe is better than Magic?
I'm not seeing it.
LOL, but then comfortably some guys say that Lamar Odom and Walton are all stars.
Perspective my friend, all my responses in this thread are sarcastic responses to Bmiller who keeps saying that this laker team is talented and its kobe's fault that they dont go anywhere.
I don't think that basketball players can be compared individually, because basketball a) isn't played in a vacuum, and b) isn't played one-on-one. I think that greatness in a basketball players is largely defined by what that player was able to elevate the players around him to do. And, in that regard alone, Magic is still far ahead of Kobe.
The greatest can make even average talent look good: wrestling fans are fond of saying that Ric Flair, in his prime, could carry a broomstick to a three-star match. I hold Magic's ability to elevate his teammates in the same regard; I believe that Magic could make a block of wood look like an All-Star. By comparison, Kobe has yet to prove that he can even make a guy with All-Star talent look like an All-Star.
You didn't qualify your statement by saying "playmaking guard."No doubt about that, but Magic was also primarily a playmaker (PG) and without his ability to make others around him better he was barely an above average scorer. By that rationale alone, you can say that Nash and Kidd are the greatest players to ever play the game.
You didn't qualify your statement by saying "playmaking guard."
I also think that Magic is a better rebounder and I'd rather give the ball to Magic with a game on the line.In Europe, playmaker = point guard. Pass first guard like Magic, and unlike Kobe. You are comparing the players only on the ability to make others better. Kobe is not a point guard, and just like individual ability is not everything in basketball, neither is the ability to make others better. Every point guard in the league makes other players better.
kobe is an ambition-driven, egocentric, arrogant person. no but's or if's; his so called amazing accomplishments/feats do not awe me. i just do not care what he does or does not. to me, it is as if he does not exist and it is much better that way, at least i can still watch basketball despite the existence of players like him.
I also think that Magic is a better rebounder and I'd rather give the ball to Magic with a game on the line.
And you didn't qualify your statement with a "European" delineation; you said "second-best guard ever." Magic and Kobe are both guards. And Magic, IMO, is better than Kobe. Being a more dynamic scorer, in and of itself, doesn't make Kobe a better guard than Magic any more than it makes Iverson a better guard than Isaiah Thomas. Kobe may be a more dominant scorer and even a better defender, but Magic IMO is better in every other aspect of the game of basketball.
Neither is Iverson; least-wise, out of all the point guards that get tagged with the "shoot first" moniker in the modern game, Iverson is no less than top-three among playmakers in that group.Magic also had the luxury to play with one of the best frontline in the NBA (certainly one of the best at the time). So with that much more room to operate, he made them look better, and they also made him look better.
Kobe has not had any success without Shaq in the lineup, but he still looks pretty good with the ball in his hands.
And I had a feeling that you were going to bring up Iverson... Kobe is not nearly as one-dimensional as you are trying to make him look...
Wow. Isn't every professional athlete ambition-driven and at least somewhat arrogant? Otherwise how would they get where they are? To dismiss someone's accomplishments just because you don't like them personally is kinda silly, IMO.
No doubt about that, but Magic was also primarily a playmaker (PG) and without his ability to make others around him better he was barely an above average scorer. By that rationale alone, you can say that Nash and Kidd are the greatest players to ever play the game.
I will agree that it's not immediately Bryant's fault that the team is sub-par, but only in the same sense that I don't think it's immediately Kevin Garnett's fault that Minnesota is terrible.
Of course, in both cases, I think that it could be fairly argued that if they had been willing to take less money, management would be in a better position to surround them with more talent.
Sure I can; I don't think there's a single player in the league that isn't overpaid, anyway. But most GMs are bound by the salary cap, so how much they pay their star player (if they even have a star player) tends to dictate how much they can offer other players.