Kobe is one of the best offensive players. Tmac is the only other player who could give him a real challenge in the scoring battles. (McGrady won last year of course) The best player means all around player. So if you compare that then of course Tim Duncan would be the best. (KG, Shaq a close second) Reasoning... Duncan *29.94 Efficiency Ranking *23.3 Points Per Game *2.93 Blocks per game *58 Double Doubles *12.9 Rebounds *51% Field Goal *2 Time MVP Kobe is a great player as well but overall game, Ducan wins Kobe *+ 28.02 Efficiency Ranking *30 Points per Game *.82 Blocks per Game *23 Double Doubles *6.90 Rebounds *45% Field Goal 3peat, yet had Shaq Simple fact is: The bigger you are in the NBA the better off you are physically
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting airforce1s:</div><div class="quote_post">Kobe is one of the best offensive players. Tmac is the only other player who could give him a real challenge in the scoring battles. (McGrady won last year of course) The best player means all around player. So if you compare that then of course Tim Duncan would be the best. (KG, Shaq a close second) Reasoning... Duncan *29.94 Efficiency Ranking *23.3 Points Per Game *2.93 Blocks per game *58 Double Doubles *12.9 Rebounds *51% Field Goal *2 Time MVP Kobe is a great player as well but overall game, Ducan wins Kobe *+ 28.02 Efficiency Ranking *30 Points per Game *.82 Blocks per Game *23 Double Doubles *6.90 Rebounds *45% Field Goal 3peat, yet had Shaq Simple fact is: The bigger you are in the NBA the better off you are physically</div> Like I have been saying time and time again ... Those efficiency rankings are not exactly the best measure of a players worth. For instance ... Jordan would not have as high an efficiency ranking as TD or KG. He is a guard and just cannot rack up those extra efficiency points garnered by being the point rebounder and just being bigger and stronger than everyone else to be able to get them. The guards in the league do things that just cannot be measured through the efficiency rankings. How can best mean most all-rounded player?! Using that criteria means Jordan was never the best in the NBA.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting the MDE:</div><div class="quote_post">Airforce1's main mission in life is to prove that Kobe isn't as good as Duncan or T-mac.</div> Thanks, but facts dont lie. Tmac isnt the best player in the league. Hes a top 5..along with Kobe
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Fiyah:</div><div class="quote_post">Like I have been saying time and time again ... Those efficiency rankings are not exactly the best measure of a players worth. For instance ... Jordan would not have as high an efficiency ranking as TD or KG. He is a guard and just cannot rack up those extra efficiency points garnered by being the point rebounder and just being bigger and stronger than everyone else to be able to get them. The guards in the league do things that just cannot be measured through the efficiency rankings. How can best mean most all-rounded player?! Using that criteria means Jordan was never the best in the NBA.</div> you're basing that on because TD and KG are taller and could get more rebounds and blocks... well it works both ways smart guy... KB is shorter so he gets to handle the ball (thus he should get more asists which he doesnt get more than KG)... and he should get more steals... since gaurds get the steals...
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting PFKApurehoops:</div><div class="quote_post">you're basing that on because TD and KG are taller and could get more rebounds and blocks... well it works both ways smart guy... KB is shorter so he gets to handle the ball (thus he should get more asists which he doesnt get more than KG)... and he should get more steals... since gaurds get the steals...</div> Someone finally sees that it works both ways. KG/TD and Kobe/TMac are both great players and its hard to even pick one. But Duncan is the better player and he hes been a 2 time MVP to prove it. And why the heck would you even consider saying that Jordan would never be the best player if you based it on that criteria?? Thats one of the dumbest posts ive ever read. You have to consider the talent at the position, assists, steals, and that Jordan is a basketball god.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting the MDE:</div><div class="quote_post">A bit off topic, but I'd be willing to play Kobe down low in a game as long as Duncan plays guard. </div> It's so tempting to take the mick about that comment....
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting airforce1s:</div><div class="quote_post">Someone finally sees that it works both ways. KG/TD and Kobe/TMac are both great players and its hard to even pick one. But Duncan is the better player and he hes been a 2 time MVP to prove it. And why the heck would you even consider saying that Jordan would never be the best player if you based it on that criteria?? Thats one of the dumbest posts ive ever read. You have to consider the talent at the position, assists, steals, and that Jordan is a basketball god.</div> What does Jordan being a basketball god have anything to do with it? We were talking about the efficiency ratings, which are based on STATISTICS, not godliness. That was one of the dumbest comments that I've ever read. Actually, if you use Jordan's stats and calculate his efficiency from.. let's say the 95-96 season, he still wouldn't have as high a rating as KG or TD. Fiyah made a good point, and your post did nothing to prove him wrong, other than say that the ratings somehow would be higher for MJ because he's a basketball god. Yeah. Sure.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Fiyah:</div><div class="quote_post">Like I have been saying time and time again ... Those efficiency rankings are not exactly the best measure of a players worth. For instance ... Jordan would not have as high an efficiency ranking as TD or KG. He is a guard and just cannot rack up those extra efficiency points garnered by being the point rebounder and just being bigger and stronger than everyone else to be able to get them. The guards in the league do things that just cannot be measured through the efficiency rankings. How can best mean most all-rounded player?! Using that criteria means Jordan was never the best in the NBA.</div> That would be why. Read all the posts..
Man, I've noticed at almost every tread that deals with Kobe MDE is convinced everyone is a kobe hater! lol! To me this is funny! TD is better then Kobe, look at the stats! I wish Kobe was the best now, but now TD is, Kobe will have his time.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting kb8gw32003:</div><div class="quote_post">Man, I've noticed at almost every tread that deals with Kobe MDE is convinced everyone is a kobe hater! lol! To me this is funny! TD is better then Kobe, look at the stats! I wish Kobe was the best now, but now TD is, Kobe will have his time.</div> All the other kobe fans except you have flipped on me for saying that Duncan is better..I even backed myself up. See if i do that again
Sometimes you have to come down to basics to get through to people. So here goes ... Hypothesis: Efficiency Rankings can be used to determine who the best all-around players are. Hence The player with the highest efficiency rankings is the best all-around player. Experiment: If we were to take Jordan's stats and calculate his efficiency ranking he would rate below TD and KG because he just doesn't have enough rebounds, double-doubles and triple-doubles to top their efficiency raking. Deduction: TD and KG are better all-around players than Jordan. If the best all-around player = best player in the league ... then you can do some subtraction, multiplication and a little division to come to the conclusion that TD and KG are better players than Jordan. Conclusion: Using that as a way to judge the best player in the league is absurd.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Fiyah:</div><div class="quote_post">Sometimes you have to come down to basics to get through to people. So here goes ... Hypothesis: Efficiency Rankings can be used to determine who the best all-around players are. Hence The player with the highest efficiency rankings is the best all-around player. Experiment: If we were to take Jordan's stats and calculate his efficiency ranking he would rate below TD and KG because he just doesn't have enough rebounds, double-doubles and triple-doubles to top their efficiency raking. Deduction: TD and KG are better all-around players than Jordan. If the best all-around player = best player in the league ... then you can do some subtraction, multiplication and a little division to come to the conclusion that TD and KG are better players than Jordan. Conclusion: Using that as a way to judge the best player in the league is absurd.</div> Exactly. Efficiency ratings are just a base to compare something. By no means, are they an accurate protrayal of how good a player is, nor should it be the sole basis for a comparison. http://www.justbball.com/forums/showthread...ight=efficiency Please click on that. Last year, I made this post, which was the rookie efficiency for all the 1st round picks, and several notables in the second round. As you can see, Carlos Boozer had a higher efficiency rating than Caron Butler. Does anyone here believe Boozer is better than Butler? Probably not. The reason Boozer was able to garner a higher rating was bec. of his better rebounding numbers, as well as FG%. Generally, big men have higher efficiency ratings bec. they happen to excel in both those areas. Guards get more assists, but usually shoot a lower percentage, and since they handle the ball more often, can get more TO's, which hurts their efficiency. Duncan and Garnett would probably have higher efficiency ratings than MJ. Can I prove it? Nope. I don't know the formula offhand. But if someone provides it for me, Id be willing to. But Boozer has a higher rating than Butler........that doesn't mean Boozer is the better player though.
