To be honest, there are some things that trump anything a person can do on the basketball court or athletics in general. I think Kobe Bryant is a phenom player and probably one of the fiercest competitors ever to don an NBA uniform, but there's that "Tiger Woods" quality of him that he's above and seperate from the people around him and that he expects respect and devotion from those underneath him and then gives none in return that disqualifies him in my mind from deserving any of the on-court honors that he thinks that he's earned.
In their respective primes? Absolutely. Garnett was just as productive and one of the greatest defenders ever. Garnett is stunningly underrated, due to playing for terrible teams in Minnesota that he, virtually alone, pulled into the playoffs. I think Garnett and Duncan were virtual equals in value.
good points. you never hear garnett in a conversation of the top 10-15..i'd still take kobe over him but garnett did have some terrible teams.
What's the ***? I don't get it? Whatever. I don't care. Your POV is moronic. You never saw Clyde play, yet you want people to 'prove' that he was better than Kobe is? That's basically imposssible to do. Kobe is a scorer. And a wonderful scorer at that. He's a better scorer than Clyde wanted to be. So if scoring is the sole measure of how you judge a basketball player, then you can't possibly be convinced that Kobe is a sham compared to Clyde. Scoring is easily the most overrated statistic used to measure basketball players. I have watched both of them play, in person. Many, many times. Clyde's game was much more varied and much, much more efficient. Bryant is excellent at getting to the rim. So was Clyde. But Clyde did the same things Kryant does, on like 8 fewer shots per game. Oh, and he added better rebounding, defense and passing to boot.
Min's list is a good start on an all-time best guess (I'd add James)... but then I'm only 42 and didn't get to see West, Oscar, Wilt, Russell, Barry (but for one year), Baylor, Cousy, and probably a few others worthy of mentioning. I wouldn't weigh in on such a list when I know that my opinion on those guys is worthless... and you've got a much longer list of unknowns Since you asked, Clyde was a better run/jump athlete. Kobe has a better jumper, but Clyde was the man on the break/open court. Dude drove and dunked on everyone all game. If he'd enjoyed the advantages of being a marketable Laker instead of being behind the numbers in Portland... geez how many extra FTs is that worth over a career? Greatness is dependent on how you define it. This statistical query rated single season production towards wins, which is a stat that is effected by having quality teammates. If one places a high value on championships then you come up with a different list even though that is also dependent on the quality of teammates. If it's straight subjectivity of who's game impressed you the most then lots of different factors can matter, but it sure helps to have seen the guy actually play. STOMP
rebounding and passing yeah.....defense? hahahaha kobe has been named to the nba all defensive team 7 times(and second team twice). guess how many for clyde? fg% okay i guess, but guess whos true shooting percentage is better? oh yeah. he has a finals mvp award too. not to shabby
Guess what doesn't matter when it comes to basketball skill? Awards. Steve Nash has 2 MVP awards. Has he EVER been the best player in the league? Nope. Not even close. Kobe is an solid defender. Clyde was better. More steals. More blocks. Better defensive rating. Since you admit you've never seen him play, I'll take it that you'll admit that you have no clue what you're talking about.
i didnt watch him play...i was 5 when he won a ring in houston...but if you look at numbers, and achievements, its a no brainer....who was more clutch?
A no brainer? Yeah...sounds like it. I like how you keep dismissing actual measurable things, like defensive ratings, passing, rebounding, etc...then pulling out bullshit like 'all defense team' and 'clutchness.' Clearly you can't be convinced that ANYONE you never saw play could possibly be as good as Kobe Bryant. That's fine. Kobe is a fine scorer.
Yeah, I wasn't counting James due to length of career to date, but I expect James to be a top-five player when all is said and done. He's right there with MJ as the best players in my lifetime.
as far as single season greatness, hell yes. I haven't seen the wins produced list for SFs but I'd bet dollars that LJ's list easily trumps KBs. For a production reference comparing the two in PER stats, if the season ended today James (@25 y/old) woud have the 4 highest seasonal ratings. By far Kobe's best PER year was when he was 27 y/old. He's doing this in Cleveland... STOMP
Given that: You never seen Clyde Drexler play. And... You say that Kobe is better than Clyde Drexler. On which lie is it that you're basing your completely uninformed opinion? Man, woman or statistic? I'm guessing none of the above. Ass pulling and or watching a few Laker's games where they TOLD you Kobe was amazing! Dude...face the facts. Clyde was brilliant. If Clyde had played his entire career in Los Angeles and Kobe had played his entire career in Portland, we'd be having this same conversation in reverse.
