I blame Scotty Brooks.

_________________

kareem, wilt, jordan, lebron, robertson.

_________________

Lebron over Kobe and Duncan and even Shaq right now is bogus. He needs to do more, and he will. Don't crown him yet.

_________________

Wow! Lebron has already surpassed Magic Bird Kobe Shaq Duncan Olajuwon and Russell? 2 championships and dominated 3 other Finals.
This is why the King, lol, gets so much hate. His fans are ready to crown him before he's accomplished his greatness.

For once, I wish someone could construct an anti-LeBron argument without going to rings. Especially now that he has 2. It's about as poor an argument as you can make. If rings are the end all be all, Rob Horry is one of the 7 best players of all time. Think about how that sounds.

If you really don't believe LeBron is great...you're either just trolling or you're simple. It's one or the other. At his peak, he's one of the 5 best players to have played. For sure. The career numbers will continue to pile up. That's a given. He's not all of a sudden going to start averaging 15 a game or something. I don't need to see the rest of his career. I've already seen enough to tell me he's better than some of the guys that are being put ahead of him currently.

Him vs. Kobe really isn't even close. At their peaks...He's bigger. He's faster. He's stronger. He's a better career 3 point shooter (and his career % is actually improving, unlike Kobe). He's a better rebounder. He's an infinitely better passer. He's a better defender. I really don't see what Kobe does better than him...other than have better teammates of course. He's a lot better at that.

In general, this conversation is doomed by different eras. It's impossible to quantify Wilt's #s compared to the modern game. So many different factors. Less teams back then, smaller players, nobody was traveling by chartered jets, arthroscopic surgery exists now, every player has a nutritionist pretty much. There's no doubt that players are better now. It's just a matter of the game evolving.

It always cracks me up when an old guy goes: "Player x could never compete in my era"...yeah, right. Everybody playing today could play in the past. Probably much more effectively than they can now. And it'll be the same thing regarding players 20 years from now when Kobe/Duncan/LeBron are talking about..."back in my era ______". Miss me with that bullshit.

Lebron is better than Kobe at pretty much everything. I hate Lebron. But I don't know how that can be denied. Kobe was a more "natural" scorer, I guess. But Lebron somehow averages more points per game there too (playoffs too). And at .5% better shooting to boot.

And stop putting five guys on Mount Rushmore, motherfuckers!

_________________

BIGBrandon2785 wrote:

Gruber>Dbo>Jermz>Souljah>Burowz>Kaos>Truth>Anis>Geo>CGJ>Cole>Bonea>
>Moe>Prime>>Joso>Vendetta> Wlad>>Finito>Victor......................... :bb: :bb: :bb: :bb: FUCKS WIT ME!!!

Straight up. I penalize Lebron for having more physically to work with. Physically, Bryant has never been anything special, even compared to the best of all time who was at that same position (Jordan). Kobe earlier on had to rely on raw skill, and then eventually cultivated the shit out of the skillset.

So for the case of putting Lebron over Kobe, he's just gonna have to do more than Kobe, and I'm not talking about championships. He's just gonna have to do more, and sustain it. Truthfully I think he will, but hes not there yet.

And I'm not some blind Kobe die hard. I spent the whole Kobe Shaq era cheering for Rasheed Wallace. I hated Kobe.

_________________

---

[quote="gruberisgod » Thu Jun 19, 2014 12:18 am']

And stop putting five guys on Mount Rushmore, motherfuckers!

[/quote]

_________________
Your Lineal Middleweight Champion Of The World!!!

MIGUEL COTTO!!!!

Okay fuck it.

Jordan, Robertson, Abdul-Jabbar, Chamberlain

_________________

---

If the rings are the end all be all? No that's being simple. But winning championships counts for something. That's why they play the game in the first place. Was Robert Horry the leader of his team? 99% of the Champions have a superstar lead them to success. The rings its what all great players play for, but it doesn't matter?
Mount Rushmore is about a career, a complete body of work. Not some who was better one on one or who has more physical gifts. Lebron wouldn't even put himself over guys like Magic at this point until he's accomplished more. I already said he's the best today so I've never denied his greatness, but his fans are .........
Yeah each era is different. You could say Lebron era is a little weaker than Jordans and Kobe's. The rule changes benefit James, also with the shortage of big men and shot blockers. No hand checking and no hard fouls and no bad boy Pistons teams to have to fight against. How you play in your era determines your status. Simply.

I never hear the ring argument when it's about other players other than Lebron. Shaq over Olajuwon is more about 5 championships to two. I'd argue that Hakeem was more versatile offensively, dangerous all over the court and could hit free throws. He was a better rebounder, better passer, way better defender. Top 5 or ten in four stats, he schooled Shaq in the Finals and most of his career he did with no stars around him. In fact he's the last guy and one of the few champions to ever win as the only all star on the team. All that and Shaq ranks higher than him to most because of what? Hey but Shaq had better teammates and was a mercenary.

Cole, when talking about lebron, or athletes in general, do you build "intagibles" into the equation? Things like being clutch, being a leader, or having killer instinct? or for you is it strictly stats?

Those things are bullshit. They're accounted for in stats. Narrative doesn't have any place when discussing who the best players of all time are. For years I've heard about how clutch Kobe is and how LeBron isn't when LeBron has much better clutch #s year in and year out. The leader thing...how would anyone know what kind of "leader" a player is? Because they yell while on camera? That's dumb. Those phrases reek of Skip Bayless and first take and all around unsophistication.

of course intangibles matter, even in this era of saber numbers and made up superficial stats. Its just how you go about talking about them and making sure you don't go overboard with certain shit.

Intangibles are reflected in tangibles. The end.

definitely some truth to that, the most important thing about being a great ''leader'' is being a great player. But ''intangibles are reflected in tangibles'' doesn't tell the whole story. Robbie Cano wasn't a great leader, not when would-be followers are hating him for being so lazy on the field on to many occasions.

You don't know nearly enough to cast judgement on Robinson Cano's leadership. Can Derek Jeter not field anymore because Robinson Cano isn't a good enough leader? Is Teixeira blowing hamstrings because of stuff Cano is doing in the locker room? "Leadership" is ridiculously overrated.

Baseball leadership is pretty much bullshit. It's team game in name, but it's really mostly a one-on-one sport -- Pitcher vs. Batter. How good or bad somebody is at firing up 50 other guys, is pretty insignificant. One individual gets on base. Then another individual drives him in. That's pretty much baseball.

It is not insignificant in basketball, though. Chemistry is really important. I don't think Lebron is much of a leader. But I don't think Kobe is either, since this is why this is coming up. I have no idea if either is true, though.

_________________

BIGBrandon2785 wrote:

Gruber>Dbo>Jermz>Souljah>Burowz>Kaos>Truth>Anis>Geo>CGJ>Cole>Bonea>
>Moe>Prime>>Joso>Vendetta> Wlad>>Finito>Victor......................... :bb: :bb: :bb: :bb: FUCKS WIT ME!!!

More like stats are overrated. For instance Kevin Garnet averaged better than 20 points per game better than 10 rebounds and better than 4 assists per game for 9 consecutive seasons in Minnesota. He went to Boston and never averaged 20,10 or 4 again. Why? Because with less talent in Minnesota he had to do everything. So his stats being high supports this. In Boston he had more help and his stats were lower. Stats don't mean shit. He was just as good but the numbers insist that he wasn't.
Ray Allen averaged 21+ straight seasons before going to Boston. In Boston he never averaged more than 18. He went from 26.4 ppg in his last year in Seattle to just 17.4 ppg the next year in Boston. Explain this. Obviously he had better scorers on his team so his stats went down.
Kobe Bryant played with the dominant Shaquille O'Neal and still averaged nearly 30 ppg. Without him Kobe got as high as 35.4 ppg until Gasol came and his numbers dropped to 27.
Stats are based on who you play with and what your team need from you to win.
When the Rockets played against Kobe there was a fear he put in you that haven't been matched since Jordan played. You didn't know if he was going to go for 40 or even 50 on any given night and carry his team to victory. When we play against Lebron I'm never worried like that and I think it's the same around the league.
Also big men, centers, which maybe because their are none anymore that's great, aren't as flashy, but are more dominant than players like Lebron. Back in the days you could feed the post all game long and good shots would come from it. It was steady and simple way to be in every game. In these Finals you see Lebron go off for 17,19 or even 20 points in one quarter. He averaged like 28 ppg. So the other 3 quarters of the game he basically did nothing. That's not being dominant. Shaq, Olajuwon, Robinson, Jabbar, and Wilt would never let it go down like that. Even Jordan knew better and became a post player and would score or make plays every quarter of the game, not just one.
In the end James put up numbers but his game was not good enough. The Spurs had huge runs over and over and Lebron would have one nice run per game. Nothing consistent to keep his team in the game and really never in the fourth quarter to win a game. He never controlled the game or never had that complete game. More turnovers than assists. He's a great player, the face of the league and marketed very well, but less not go to far with hype.
If he's the goat, then i guess Floyd is the goat of boxing as well and Manning is the best football player that ever lived

I don't see how leadership would be significant in the NBA if Lebron and KOBE aren't considered good leaders. Lebron and Kobe in his prime, based on rings and wins who else would you rather play with?? Anyway since Jeter came up, dude has been a HOF player, conducted himself with 100 % professionalism on and off the field, has never been in trouble on or off the field, and is widely loved and respected as a whole package. Probably all things that should be a given, but clearly its not with all players. Now does all of that rub off on other players and make for a more cohesive and motivated unit?? Probably yes and no. idk. its whatever you think. Jeter is the ultimate leader is all I know. its pretty much a fact in the world of the Yankees. Captain.

The Lakers teams were chock full of glue guys that kept each other good. Fisher, Fox, Shaw, Ron Harper, A.C. Green, Robert F'n Horry, Horace Grant. It's ridiculous how many of those dudes those teams had. I always thought it was them that kept those teams together. It certainly wasn't Shaq and Kobe in the middle of their dick-waving-athon, which was fucking embarrassing. How could it be? The great player/leader combination, usually has to make sure the supporting guys not only know that they're supporting guys, but are happy to be that. The Lakers supporting cast, had already been doing that elsewhere. On other championship teams. They were self sufficient on that front. Hell, the year they ditched the glue guys for more Shaq and Kobe's (Malone and GP), the team fell apart.

Kobe was obviously better during the Lakers second push, but Pau and Bynum fucking hated him, so I'm not sure that's great leadership. It got things done, though, so good enough.

With Lebron, I just can't forget Cleveland. And what I mean by that, those teams were so superficially close. They had all the pregame ritual shit, the fake taking pictures of each other, the dancing, all that shit. And sports writers (before they turned on him) used to paint Lebron as the anti-Kobe, because his teammates supposedly loved him, and his team was supposedly so close (they since switched their allegiances to D. Rose, then Durant). But then Lebron left, and we found out they weren't close at all. The lockerroom was fucking scandalous. And this was before Lebron left. Teammates didn't really like him. And judging by the way he went out in those last two games against Boston, he didn't like them either. It was all for show. So yes he's winning now (with three other hall of famers, and a top basketball guy of all time as his GM), but when I see the Miami team with their photobombing, and all their "we're so close" posturing, I get some Cleveland vibes. Judging by the success, I don't think Lebron is a bad leader. I'm a little skeptical how good, though.

I don't know, I think team chemistry is more important in basketball than most sports, but teams still win in spite of it, I guess.

_________________

BIGBrandon2785 wrote:

Gruber>Dbo>Jermz>Souljah>Burowz>Kaos>Truth>Anis>Geo>CGJ>Cole>Bonea>
>Moe>Prime>>Joso>Vendetta> Wlad>>Finito>Victor......................... :bb: :bb: :bb: :bb: FUCKS WIT ME!!!

Lebron was either insanely good during the Cleveland run, or that team was virtually perfectly built around him(in spite of the fact that everyone kept saying he didnt have help), or the East sucked completely, or some strange varying combination of all three.

_________________

---

Grubes right about the laker drama. I had to read about that shit everyday for a decade and a half. Bryant and shaq wouldn't even talk to each other, so the other players served as mediators, kinda. Bryant would also blame gasol for almost every single one of his turnovers. Gasol just went with it cuz he knew his role.

As far as chemistry I think its pretty important. Some players you'll break your back for. Others will make you crazy. Confidence is such a fickle thing for ball players, too. Especially in crunch time. Good teammates and good leaders will help with that.

You got different types of leaders. Some do it vocally. Others just do their job day in and day out. Shaq was a leader because you knew he was going to dominate and get his teammates open shots. Kobe was going to take the pressure off of guys by taking the challenge and trying to dominate scoring especially in the 4th quarter, he'd take over the game. You don't have to be liked to be a leader. It's more about getting the job done and taking the responsibility for the team, win or lose.
Lebron has been compared to Magic and spoken of being an unselfish player. If that was true his scoring would have dropped and his assists would be in double digits when he came to Miami. He would've made Bosh a better player, Wade better and all his other teammates better. Instead he battled out Wade to be the top scorer and Wade and Bosh numbers went down to all time lows while Lebron kept his high to compete for more mvp trophies. In the end he have the Heat more talented group being compared to Cleveland.
As dominant of a scorer Wilt was when he set his mind up to lead the league in assists he did just that. Magic and Bird could score 30 or 40 but instead found ways to get their team involved more and it resulted in them competing for championships year in year out for the same team that drafted them.