- Jan 2, 2010
- 82,779
- 118,277
You just exposed yourself with this response.
You just gonna ignore the 30k points and his other accomplishments?
IS KOBE BRYANT...OVERRATED?
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by goldenchild9,
- Start date
You just exposed yourself with this response.
You just gonna ignore the 30k points and his other accomplishments?
- Jan 2, 2010
- 82,779
- 118,277
.
Last edited:
- Oct 29, 2007
- 985
- 46
All due respect to George Mikan, pioneer and 1st superstar in the NBA. But just because he was the First doesn't mean he belongs in the top 10. You give respect and that's where it ends. There's a reason why you never see him in anyones top 10. Same with Bob Pettit and Elgin Baylor who had a huge impact on the game on all levels.
Again, I don't see how impact on tv ratings or marketing appeal has anything to do with where someone ranks in the top 10.
Again, I don't see how impact on tv ratings or marketing appeal has anything to do with where someone ranks in the top 10.
longstroke
Banned
- Aug 20, 2012
- 1,461
- 376
Nope, not my booty, but this info may make yours a bit uncomfortable,
[h3]OST-JORDAN DECLINE[/h3]
The retirement of Michael Jordan set in motion the decline in NBA ratings which continues today. Ratings for the 1999 NBA Finals (which in fairness, came after a lockout shortened season) were down significantly from the previous year, from an 18.7 to an 11.3. Primetime regular season games, which had become fairly routine (and highly-rated) during the Jordan years, set record lows for NBC once Jordan retired. With the rise of the Los Angeles Lakers in the early part of the 2000s (decade), ratings improved, but never to the level of the 1980s or 1990s.The highest NBA Finals ratings on NBC after Jordan left was the 2001 Finals, which featured the dominant and then-defending champion Lakers with Shaq and Kobe Bryant versus the polarizing Allen Iverson and the underdog Philadelphia 76ers. The ratings for that series were a 12.1, still down 35 percent from 1998. NBC's last Finals, in 2002, came after a resurgence in playoff ratings (including a 14.2 rating for Game 7 of the Western Conference Finals). However, the Finals itself registered the lowest ratings the event had seen since 1981, topping out at a 10.2 average.
If you are going to talk about the greats and then their place in history, you must talk about the era in which they played, and the impact they had on the game.
Mikan was the best of his era, and he changed the game.
Wilt was the best of his era, and he changed the game.
Russ was the greatest winner of his era, and he too changed the game.
Oscar, changed the game.
Kareem, the all time greatest scorer, changed the game.
Doc, carried two leagues, introduced showmanship and athletic excitement, then changed the game and how it was watched.
We all know how Magic and Larry, and then Mike changed the game...
...so what has Kobe Bryant done above being able to score the ball? How does that put him in the top ten?
ohmygosher
Banned
- Jul 18, 2012
- 8,072
- 2,447
I don't know who you are.
Don't flatter yourself.
You have an Adidas avy and are constantly in the Nike shoe threads talking about how horrible their shoes are.
Old gimmick, is old.
But to answer your question, YOU got ether'd.
Had you requesting a friendly quit.
I think that says enough.
However, you know who I may be.
That says even more.
Carry on.
But, I don't know who you are.
longstroke
Banned
- Aug 20, 2012
- 1,461
- 376
Oh...it's no exposure on my end, I can assure you of that.
- Jan 3, 2011
- 18,782
- 10,183
The EXACT same thing can be said about Jordan & Kareem.
That's what they are remembered for MOSTLY in their careers.
Don't even try to deny it.
Everyone knows that Kareem, Jordan, and Kobe did a lot of stuff great besides scoring but the number 1 thing these legends are remembered for is scoring.
Regardless of how they did it with Kareem's sky hook or Jordan's flashy dunks early in his career and his ability to adjust his game and be un stoppable with his fade away and mid range game towards the end of his career.
Last edited:
darthska
Staff member
- Apr 30, 2004
- 46,970
- 31,584
[quote name="LONGSTROKE"]Oh...it's no exposure on my end, I can assure you of that.
[/quote] Yes, it is.
Comparing Horry to other multiple ringed players is always an exposure.
When people make the 'rings' argument, it has to do w/ starters; it boggles my mind how many people fail to grasp this. You've been exposed as one of those people.
[/quote] Yes, it is.
Comparing Horry to other multiple ringed players is always an exposure.
When people make the 'rings' argument, it has to do w/ starters; it boggles my mind how many people fail to grasp this. You've been exposed as one of those people.
Last edited:
- Jan 2, 2010
- 82,779
- 118,277
When dudes start reaching for the Robert Horry response you're done.
longstroke
Banned
- Aug 20, 2012
- 1,461
- 376
What impact has Kobe Bryant had on the game, that makes him equal to both Kareem and Jordan?
This is the ultimate test of the all time greats. Even when people talk about the greats in baseball, boxing, football, all sports, they speak of impact, even soccer.
What was Kobe Bryant's impact on the game, and did he actually carry the league as did Jordan and Kareem?
If you are honest, you know that he didn't, and he still does not.
This is what separates the good, from the greats.
Top ten all time, HELL NO.
longstroke
Banned
- Aug 20, 2012
- 1,461
- 376
According to who?
powerballin
Banned
- Nov 4, 2012
- 3,756
- 2,706
Old man back at it again. Dude sounds like a jv coach stuck in 1984.
longstroke
Banned
- Aug 20, 2012
- 1,461
- 376
If this is directed toward me...
... if I said something like this it would be called condescending, then considered a personal attack.
- Oct 5, 2006
- 8,322
- 335
at jv coach stuck in 1984 Dead
- May 25, 2012
- 1,225
- 341
So if he were to say Derek Fisher's 5 rings instead of Robert Horry's 7 rings, that would make the argument valid? I love how dudes always bring up Kobes 5 rings in arguments as if winning rings is an individual achievement.
Last edited:
- Oct 3, 2012
- 792
- 194
Winning rings isnt an individual achievment.
But, Kobe was more instrumental in contributing to his 5 than Horry was to his 7.
They are 2 different class of players. Kobe is a legend. Horry is a glorified role player.
Just ask yourself, rings aside...who's skill set would you rather have?
But, Kobe was more instrumental in contributing to his 5 than Horry was to his 7.
They are 2 different class of players. Kobe is a legend. Horry is a glorified role player.
Just ask yourself, rings aside...who's skill set would you rather have?
member 2323
Banned
- Jul 27, 2012
- 113
- 44
If that's the case, then LeBron James was more instrumental in contributing to his 1 than Kobe was to his 5.
longstroke
Banned
- Aug 20, 2012
- 1,461
- 376
They don't understand that just because Kobe Bryant has five rings, that it does not in any way make him more relevant than either Oscar Robertson, nor Jerry West.
It doesn't make him better, nor more relevant than Julius Erving either.
Rings only mean that you've won a chip. That's cool, but some would even say that the Lakers won those rings, in SPITE of Kobe Bryant.
We all can see that LeBron has done much more with much less, then even getting to the finals with a coach that was given a short leash in L A.
Players like that are a pleasure to watch.
They also love to move the goal posts. In baseball, Babe Ruth is still relevant, then still considered top ten due to the dominance of his era, then how he himself transcended the game. So in hoops, are you telling me that Mikan is no longer relevant?
Pele is no longer relevant in soccer?
When forming the top ten or the all time greats, you must understand and then count who dominanted their respective era. You cannot compare the eras in which they played, because they played WHEN they played, against who was placed in front of them.
While Kobe did score plenty, he did NOT dominate his era.
Some would say that Tim Duncan deserves consideration in the same era, who was far more instrumental in winning rings for his team, if rings are going to be used as a measuring stick.
Which proves that Kobe's place in the upper echelon with Mikan, Wilt, Russ, Oscar, Kareem, Doc, Larry Magic and Jordan, is not only debatable, but also laughable.
All of those guys DOMINATED their era's, with Doc doing it in TWO pro leagues. There was no question as to who the best player was in Pro Basketball while he was in his prime. He was who people, non fans of the game and real fans, future players alike, came to SEE. His influence on the game is unquestioned.
What has Kobe Bryant done, to be mentioned in that same catagory?
He was on a winning team?
So was Horry.
Last edited:
powerballin
Banned
- Nov 4, 2012
- 3,756
- 2,706
longstroke
Banned
- Aug 20, 2012
- 1,461
- 376
- Feb 15, 2003
- 1,919
- 54
I see why I hardly use this forum to discuss basketball anymore, posts like these show no objectivity and are fueled by the poster's disdain for Kobe. Let's look at the common criticisms of the man.
He played the role of "Robin" during his 1st 3 championships: Why wouldn't he? Shaq was clearly the most dominant player in the NBA at the time & I'm hard pressed to think of another guard in history that would have deserved more touches than the Diesel during those years.
He quit on his team: Kobe played his tail off, averaging 28, 6 & 5 assists during that series. Pushed the 2nd seeded Suns to the brink of elimination, but that Laker team was completely overwhelmed by a vastly better Suns team. The Lakers were down by 17 points in the 1st quarter & 15 at the half, Its clear that they weren't going to win if Kobe kept monopolizing the ball. Tried to get his teammates involved (that roster is cringe worthy) & ended up getting blown out by a fired up Phoenix team. Don't see why this is an issue.
He's never shot over 50% in a season: Truth, his shot selection has always been questionable. Using advanced metrics, Kobe's .555% True Shooting percentage is higher than Jerrry West's .550% & not that far away from Michael Jordan's .569% True Shooting percentage.
He's always surrounded by great players: In the last 30 years, how many teams have won a championship without multiple All-Stars? Dallas in 2011, Detroit in 2004, San Antonio in 2003 & 1999, Houston in 1994 & '95, Chicago in 1991, Detroit in 1989. 8 teams total. The 1994-95 Houston Rockets had a roster with 2 career all-stars. Hakeem & 1 time-all star Sam Cassell. What does this tell you? Most teams win with multiple great players. No one complains about Larry or Magic coming into great situations as rookies, why Kobe?
Compared to Robert Horry: LOL. A guy who isn't a Hall of Famer & hasn't even been an all-star being compared to Kobe? Mark Madsen has more rings than LeBron, what does that prove?
If you don't like Kobe, fine. But to discredit his game & place in history makes you look like you'd rather be watching Basketball Wives instead of an actual game of basketball.
He played the role of "Robin" during his 1st 3 championships: Why wouldn't he? Shaq was clearly the most dominant player in the NBA at the time & I'm hard pressed to think of another guard in history that would have deserved more touches than the Diesel during those years.
He quit on his team: Kobe played his tail off, averaging 28, 6 & 5 assists during that series. Pushed the 2nd seeded Suns to the brink of elimination, but that Laker team was completely overwhelmed by a vastly better Suns team. The Lakers were down by 17 points in the 1st quarter & 15 at the half, Its clear that they weren't going to win if Kobe kept monopolizing the ball. Tried to get his teammates involved (that roster is cringe worthy) & ended up getting blown out by a fired up Phoenix team. Don't see why this is an issue.
He's never shot over 50% in a season: Truth, his shot selection has always been questionable. Using advanced metrics, Kobe's .555% True Shooting percentage is higher than Jerrry West's .550% & not that far away from Michael Jordan's .569% True Shooting percentage.
He's always surrounded by great players: In the last 30 years, how many teams have won a championship without multiple All-Stars? Dallas in 2011, Detroit in 2004, San Antonio in 2003 & 1999, Houston in 1994 & '95, Chicago in 1991, Detroit in 1989. 8 teams total. The 1994-95 Houston Rockets had a roster with 2 career all-stars. Hakeem & 1 time-all star Sam Cassell. What does this tell you? Most teams win with multiple great players. No one complains about Larry or Magic coming into great situations as rookies, why Kobe?
Compared to Robert Horry: LOL. A guy who isn't a Hall of Famer & hasn't even been an all-star being compared to Kobe? Mark Madsen has more rings than LeBron, what does that prove?
If you don't like Kobe, fine. But to discredit his game & place in history makes you look like you'd rather be watching Basketball Wives instead of an actual game of basketball.
- Jul 25, 2009
- 5,599
- 736
Last edited:
longstroke
Banned
- Aug 20, 2012
- 1,461
- 376
At a certain point during their careers, the NBA has been described as Mikan's, Wilt's, Russell's, Oscar's, Kareem's, Doc's, Magic's, Bird's, and Jordan's league.
If Kobe Bryant is to be mentioned in the same breath as the aforementioned, at what point did the NBA become Kobe Bryant's league?
Has it ever?
If Kobe Bryant is to be mentioned in the same breath as the aforementioned, at what point did the NBA become Kobe Bryant's league?
Has it ever?
Last edited:
- Sep 25, 2004
- 8,931
- 3,513
i've seen it all.
from people discreditting manu and parker, to now discrediting duncan to make their case to DISCREDIT kobe. if you gotta go through all those hoops and nitpicking just to make your case, i dont even.. wow
from people discreditting manu and parker, to now discrediting duncan to make their case to DISCREDIT kobe. if you gotta go through all those hoops and nitpicking just to make your case, i dont even.. wow
ohmygosher
Banned
- Jul 18, 2012
- 8,072
- 2,447
Last edited:
