Kobe has never been this good: http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playo...llinger_john&page=BestFinalsGame-Individual-8
False. MJ delivered the kind of goods in NBA Finals games that those three never have. Drexler wasn't as good as Jordan. Kobe never will be. LeBron had good enough teammates to get the league's best record in back to back years but he choked in the playoffs in the way Jordan never ever did.
No way any of those guys taking MJ's spot on the bulls would win 6 championships. I doubt if all 3 were on the Bulls teams they would win 6 championships especially if MJ was in his prime on another team. MJ was so much better then any of those guys and he is the greatest player to ever play in the NBA. This is coming from someone that disliked MJ and was always rooting for the BLazers to beat him and win a championship. Also if you replaced Drexler with MJ on those Blazer teams we would have won at least 6 championships.
MJ has choked (below LeBron's 2010 level) in his prime twice in 1992 and in 1988 over the entire post-season. James is 25 years old so you have no understanding of how his career will shape up. Mo Williams is probably the biggest softy I've ever witnessed. Lebron has underperformed once so far in a post-season run. Orlando doesn't count he was a beast. Consistently over-performs if anything, 07, 08, 09 come to mind. All I remember is the year MJ won MVP and DPOY he got beat in 5 games in the second round. LeBron has played in 50 more playoff games so far, I'd say ringless Jordan is definitely inferior to Lebron. We'll have to see how the rest of the career shapes out.
I don't really care how their careers turn out. I have followed and watched the NBA back when Bill Russell was playing. MJ is the best player I have seen and that is saying a lot because I have seen many great players. Lebron iand Kobe are both really good players but I wouldn't rank them in the top 10 best players but Kobe is close. I'm not as high on Lebron as a great player like most people. I do think he probably will win a couple championships but that also depends a lot on his team.
He didn't play at Jordan Level the entire playoffs, in fact that was his worst statistical championship run. Kobe is a "really good" player, LeBron is a historic player. You don't have to care about him, but he's clearly in a different league. Pace adjust his numbers to 100 possessions this year, it is something crazy like 40/11/10 (Jordan did that once iirc, with slightly less assists). Yes that is insane, and we do need to pay attention to the rest of his career. Merely for ranking purposes, not because you have to like him. LeBron's played in 7 seasons, a couple as a teenager. LeBron has a higher statistical peak so far than Jordan, so it isn't crazy to say "wait and see". That should be an interesting career.
I don't really look at stats or numbers my opinion is from just watching them. If you go by numbers Wilt is the greatest NBA player of all time. Wilt was great but not the best. I watched the Bill Russell/Wilt match ups and Russell IMO was the better player but stats say Wilt was far better. Trust me Lebron isn't a historic player.
What you remember is meaningless, only what happened matters (no disrespect meant). Wilt does not have the greatest numbers of all time, that is another error (take for example WS/48 in the playoffs). Your opinion and my opinion have zero value, that's why we should resort to objective figures. Maybe if Bill Russell was more efficient than Ben Wallace I would be on his side. But that isn't the case.
We will have to disagree then because numbers alone me nothing. You saying Wilt doesn't have the greatest numbers. That depends on what stats/numbers you are looking at.
The advanced numbers that adjust for the chucking in Wilt's era. Part of every argument is to provide objective evidence for your position. Without that ability, and probably being prone to bias by relying on selective memory, you'll always be at a disadvantage. You're not really just looking at the raw numbers are you? Because Bill isn't even the rebounder Rodman is. Almost every single under-performer in NBA history probably took a dip in their playoff numbers. This is a trend that has repeated itself over and over, and it occurred with Wilt. No surprise to me at all. It hasn't occurred with the truly historic modern players like LeBron, Jordan, etc.
I didn't say anything about Bill Russell's rebounding even though he was a very good rebounder. I said from watching the Wilt/Russell matchups IMO Russell was the better player. They both had good numbers with Wilt many times having the advantage in numbers.
For such a "chucking" era, Wilt played a career 45.8 MPG (that's 2.2 MPG of REST), ran up the court and scored, ran down the court and played D (huge rebound numbers). Your stats do not come close to telling the story.
He played in an era that simply didn't put as much of an emphasis on defense. That's why teams averaged 15+ more PPG and shot 6% less efficiently than today's league average. He wouldn't be able to play those minutes with a contemporary focus on other traits. Hence a WS/48 column in basketball-reference.
6% less efficient doesn't square with your bogus statement that they didn't put emphasis on defense. Pace means they used less of the :24 clock, it doesn't mean they played less hard at either end of the floor.
They allowed more points by quite a significant amount (nothing bogus about it), because the emphasis of the game was on chucking. They shot lower because of their terrible shot selection (Kobe is a more efficient scorer than Wilt btw). It is impossible to average today's percentages on ~2000 more shots a season. They managed to accomplish both of these dubious goals. Wilt has a TS% of 52.4 % in the playoffs, 2% below today's league average. Not the best way to average 22.8 PER. More importantly, it doesn't matter what you want to call it. You could claim they played terrific defense, they still played ball hog basketball and took a ridiculous amount of uncalled for shots by today's standards. That era would have to be re-taught how to play basketball. 6% less efficient just reflects on how poor the average basketball player was back then to now. Not to mention the lower pool of talent and other racial issues.
