Of course I agree with you Jurassic. I still talk about Nate Thurmond and Hal Greer and will always talk about Bernard King, guys who captured my imagination with their awesome individual basketball moves or, in Thurmond's case, raw power. The point I wanted to make but did so poorly because I should have been working was what separates the new great kids from the modern greats, not stats but winning in epic fashion or proportion as in the cases of Bird, Jordan and Magic, or with magical innovative and creative skills --and Maravich is the only name that comes to mind. Yes, in 20 years I am talking about Gail Goodrich, George Gervin, Alex English and the list goes on. But will the people who are not devoted fans be talking about these players (and Iverson, James and ...if they don't capture victory when not expected or often and decisively) and only Jordan, Bird and Magic? This may seem like a ridiculous jump, but would modern military historians still be obsessed with Hannibal if he had remained only the great Carthaginian general in Spain and never crossed the Alps in Winter with 17,000 men and kicked the Romans' behinds all over Italy? Bird, Jordan and Magic would have (in my silly opinion).
These comparisons are really bad...even based on stats. I'd also love to see a Wade comparison, though.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Swish15:</div><div class="quote_post">Kobe Bryant is more like Michael Jordan than Tracy McGrady is. Anyone care to debate this? </div> Well the article already proved that T-Mac's last season was statistically a lot more similar to Jordan's numbers. I know I would MUCH MUCH rather have T-Mac then Kobe on my team. I like team players, and we all saw T-Macs numbers in the 03-04 season when he ball hogged like Kobe. They were also better than Kobes numbers in the 04-05 season when Kobe ball hogged w/o Shaw to keep him in check. T-Mac trusts his teammates, something Kobe would not even do w/ Shaq and his high FG%. T-Mac <font size=""7""><font color=""Red"">></font></font> Kobe
