But you're a clown thoughNOT AS MUCH AS U DO, NAAH
WE IN HERE TALKIN SPORTS AND U IN HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE DUDES TALKIN BOUT SPORTS
RE-EVALUATE UR LIFE HOMO
Like every thing you post is trash.
Everything.
Doc Rivers says "LEBRON JAMES IS TOP 5 ALL TIME WITHOUT A DOUBT"
- Thread starter SuaveHooper88
- Start date
Like every thing you post is trash.
Everything.
But you're a clown though
Like every thing you post is trash.
Everything.
A CLOWN IS ONE WHO ENTERS A SPORTS THREAD TO DISCUSS HIS FEELINGS ON ANOTHER MAN
Art Barr
INVADING SOHH CHAMPION
00000000000000000000000000000022Magic
Jordan
Dr j
Connie
Wilt
Those are the top five actualized skill players all time, period.
The first reason why bron won't be top five is the elephant in the room.
he changed positions from his natural to be at best better than Scottie at the three.
All because in history mj can lay claim to also being the greatest pg of all time, as well.
So, just the fact Jordan is better at bron's natural kills bron off top.
If we go skill, bron is not more skilled at the three or one than magic or dr j.
So, how is he top five all time.
This is like a doc rivers troll job to lay claim to being the best in chicago bball history.
when mj got that sewn up and made doc an after thought in Chicago grassroots bball mythos as well.
Doc's comments reeks of sneak dissin, in a number of ways.
From mj, magic to even bird.
Especially, if you know the narrative.
Art Barr
Jordan
Dr j
Connie
Wilt
Those are the top five actualized skill players all time, period.
The first reason why bron won't be top five is the elephant in the room.
he changed positions from his natural to be at best better than Scottie at the three.
All because in history mj can lay claim to also being the greatest pg of all time, as well.
So, just the fact Jordan is better at bron's natural kills bron off top.
If we go skill, bron is not more skilled at the three or one than magic or dr j.
So, how is he top five all time.
This is like a doc rivers troll job to lay claim to being the best in chicago bball history.
when mj got that sewn up and made doc an after thought in Chicago grassroots bball mythos as well.
Doc's comments reeks of sneak dissin, in a number of ways.
From mj, magic to even bird.
Especially, if you know the narrative.
Art Barr
Lord_Chief_Rocka
Superstar
No. But you apparently suck at reading comprehension, so maybe I need to carefully explain every point I make slowly and carefully from now on.
No I didn't.
I listed Duncan going up against a team with Kobe AND Shaq. If you're saying that superstars are what matter, are you saying that Duncan is a better superstar than prime Kobe/Shaq combined?
I listed Dirk going up against a team with Lebron AND Wade. If you're saying that superstars are what matter, are you saying that Dirk is a better superstar than Lebron and Wade combined?
Or is it maybe that the rest of the team matters just as much as counting superstars does?
And yet neither of them won Finals MVP, because the Warriors were LOSING until Iggy was given prominence, weren't they? So maybe something more than superstars matter?
And Lebron was winning that series if he just had guards who could make more than 30% of their shots and anyone whatsoever on the bench. He didn't need more superstars.
Besides, ain't Klay just "B-side" anyway?
Played and coached, but you wouldn't know that.
My first year coaching we kicked a kid ranked top-100 for California off our team because he wouldn't do running drills and we were a running team. His walking around the court shyt while everyone else was running was bad for chemistry. We had a tight team without him, solid at every position, so it was better to have a full squad balling their ass off than a prima donna screwing things up, even if he was the most talented guy on the team. Later in the season he came begging for his spot back, and the team agreed to let him back if he did all the running. We were better for it, and we challenged for the league title that year.
Superstars aren't everything. Good coaching and chemistry across the full squad with 0-1 weak positions at most, matters just as much if not more than who your star is.
Just off the top of my head, I gave you 11 times in the last 15 years where a team that was CLEARLY inferior in the "superstar" department was able to advance over teams that were more loaded. Three times where a guy who wasn't a superstar at all was named Finals MVP. And 15 major superstars in the last 20 years who never won a title at all, while teams like Detroit have picked one up when their best player was Chancey Billups. Hell, the Blazers were one quarter away from a likely title when their best player was Sheed averaging 16ppg.
You claimed, "Super Stars are what counts in the playoffs". I proved to you that it's obvious as hell that other stuff counts at least as much.
You can't read worth shyt.
I never said anything like that. Quote me.
I said that the teams that Lebron-led teams have beaten are better than the teams that Kobe-led teams have beaten. And proved it with a full list.
2016 Warriors (73 wins), 2015 Hawks (60 wins), 2013 Spurs (58 wins), 2012 Thunder (58 wins pro-rated), 2011 Bulls (62 wins).
Name the best 5 teams that Kobe has beaten since he took leadership of the team.
2007 Pistons, 2011 Celtics, 2011 Bulls, 2012 Celtics, 2012 Thunder, 2013 Pacers, 2013 Spurs, 2014 Pacers, 2015 Hawks, 2016 Warriors
Name 10 teams that the Kobe-led Lakers beat which were better than those 10.
Conference strength is way less important than you make it out to be, because every year a title contender is only going to play 1-2 teams with a chance from their own conference, plus 1 team from the other conference.
2008 Lakers playing the 54-win Jazz in the Conference Semis when Mehmet Okur was their 2nd-best player and D-Will was the leader.
2009 Lakers playing the 53-win Rockets in the Conference Semis when Ron Artest was leading a bunch of borderline starters.
2010 Lakers playing the 53-win Jazz team again in the Conference Semis.
None of those teams were meaningful opponents at all. So the Lakers only played ONE meaningful series in their own conference, and ONE in the other conference, each of those years.
Same goes for Lebron. Except for 2011 when the East was stacked with Chicago/Boston/Miami all still strong, Lebron's contending teams have only had one real challenge in the East as well. So he has one big series in the East, and one big series in the West.
As far as the games that really matter, it usually evens out, no matter what conference you're in.
You see - this is where your dumbass "superstar" theory shines through.
Yeah, the Spurs had Duncan and Parker, and they balled out even though Duncan was getting past that era when he could carry a team on both ends of the floor. The other three starters were Oberto, who was a POS, and the 35-year-olds Finley and Bowen who were both ready to retire and had become trash. Those three starters COMBINED for 16-6-3 on the series and got killed on defense.
The Spurs had three of their five starters combine for 16-6-3.
Do you realize that that means those three guys averaged about 5-2-1 each, and they were starting.
With Ginobli limping, the other guys off the bench were 36-year-old Brent Barry, 35-year-old Kurt Thomas, and Ide Udoka.
That team was trash outside of Duncan and Parker. Duncan averaged 22-17-5 and 2 blocks/game, but Gasol/Odom combined (26-19-6 and 3 blocks) more than neutralized him. Kobe was better than Parker, and the rest of the Lakers were at least as good as the remnants that the Spurs were trying to play.
That lack of depth beyond the big 3 is why that Spurs team only won 56 games even with Ginobli averaging 20-5-5 in his best season ever. When he got hit by that ankle injury, they were dead men walking.
That's what I keep talking about with the rest of the lineup mattering. The fact that the Lakers had Gasol AND Odom, and Fisher/Vlad/Farmar at least playing competently, matters a lot when the Spurs' 3rd best player in the series was 36-year-old Brent Barry.
A 60-win Hawks team with Carroll limping (and that injury wasn't until near the end of Game 1, when the Cavs with Love/Irving/Shump all hurt were still beating the Hawks on their own floor) was at least as good a bet to advance to the Finals than a 56-win Spurs team that had lost their leading scorer and only had 2 competent players left on the whole team.
Also, I like how you're playing into my hands,
Arguing that the 56-win Spurs were better than the 60-win Hawks, so achieving an arbitrary wins milestone like "50" is meaningless.
At the same time claiming that the 2nd-best team a Kobe-led team ever beat was better than the 5th-best team a Lebron-led team ever beat.
Kobestan will NEVER keep their arguments straight without a mid-thread self-contradiction, because they have no logic to the argument.
This nikka really thinks he's right just because he writes a 5 paragraph essay every post
So now superstars aren't the most important thing in the playoffs
That's not a theory nikka that's the way it's always been
You think the Hawks would've beaten the 08 Spurs
This guy maybe legit retarded
Lord_Chief_Rocka
Superstar
Who said he's the greatest?
If someone claimed a player batting .250 was the greatest hitter ever they'd be ridiculed.
Sccit has (incorrectly) said Kobe is the goat many times
You claimed, "superstars are what matter", and I answered, "No, coaching and the rest of the team matters just as much."
No one ever wins a title off of just superstars. Every single player in modern bball history has also needed solid coaching and/or a filled out team. But sometimes teams do win a chip without a superstar. So superstars are obviously not the only thing that matters, and you can't get on a team and say it has no chance just because it doesn't have a "superstar". The 2014 Spurs and 2004 Pistons are still looking at you.
But you can't name ONE team that won a chip while having guys that sucked as bad as 2008 Bowen/Oberto/Finley at 3 out of 5 starting positions.
You think the Hawks would've beaten the 08 Spurs
This guy maybe legit retarded
You do realize that those Spurs only won ONE playoff series in the next three years, even bringing back all the same meaningful players and getting Ginobli healthy, right?
And let's count one more time:
2008 Spurs starters in the Laker series:
31-year-old Duncan (22-17-5)
25-year-old Parker (19-4-6)
36-year-old Bowen (7-1-1)
34-year-old Finley (6-2-1)
32-year-old Oberto (3-3-1)
best off the bench? 36-year-old Barry, injured Ginobli, and Udoka.
Their 3rd-leading scorer was 36-year-old Brent Barry.
Their #2 and #3 big men were Oberto and Udoka.
They had to choose between an injured Ginobli and a 36-year-old Bowen to guard prime Kobe.
You think that THAT team was a Finals contender once Ginobli got hurt?
No team has won a chip with utter crap in 3/5 starting positions and the bench in your lifetime. And even their second "star" was a guy who didn't make the all-star team that year and had never made an All-NBA team in his life to that point.
You are REALLY overplaying the 2008 Spurs. They lost Horry and straight-up couldn't handle Ginobli's injury, plus just about everyone else on the roster was WAY too old. You do realize that they only won ONE playoff series in the next three years, right?
2009 they brought back the EXACT SAME roster plus Matt Bonner and Drew Gooden, and got wasted by the 6th-seed Mavs in the 1st round. That was the Mavs team that nearly got swept by the Nuggets in the next round. But they were title contenders!
2010 they got back a healthy Ginobli balling, also added Jefferson, Hill, and McDyess, and got SWEPT by the Suns in the 2nd round.
2011 with those same guys, lose to the 8th-seed Grizzlies in the first round.
But you know what? That same team, same core, managed to win 20 straight late in 2012 and nearly make the NBA Finals, come within one shot of winning the chip in 2013, and then win the championship in dominating fashion in 2014, without adding a single all-star, even though all their stars were much older by that point.
That's what happens when you finally fill out a team with the right role players.
You keep saying, "But the 2008 Spurs!" as if they could do anything with a hurt Ginobli when they were embarking on a 4 out of 5 losing streak in playoff series over the next four years even WITH Ginobli for 3/5 of those. If that team was all that, then where did they go?
Of course, you can't explain that, because you didn't even know that. You'll just keep yelling, "2008 Spurs!" as if 2008 Duncan and Parker could win a ring playing 2 on 5.
Last edited:
Illuminatos
#OVOXO
Lord_Chief_Rocka
Superstar
If you think hawks would be favored against any Spurs team since Duncan you don't know shyt about basketballYou hypocritical moron.
I write a short post, and you misinterpret the hell out of it because you can't read.
So I explain the post nice and slow for your dumb ass, and you're like, "Look at this guy, writing so much!"
And yet you still can't even get the point there either.
You claimed, "superstars are what matter", and I answered, "No, coaching and the rest of the team matters just as much."
No one ever wins a title off of just superstars. Every single player in modern bball history has also needed solid coaching and/or a filled out team. But sometimes teams do win a chip without a superstar. So superstars are obviously not the only thing that matters, and you can't shyt on a team and say it has no chance just because it doesn't have a "superstar". The 2014 Spurs and 2004 Pistons are still looking at you.
But you can't name ONE team that won a chip while having guys that sucked as bad as 2008 Bowen/Oberto/Finley at 3 out of 5 starting positions.
You do realize that those Spurs only won ONE playoff series in the next three years, even bringing back all the same meaningful players and getting Ginobli healthy, right?
And let's count one more time:
2008 Spurs starters in the Laker series:
31-year-old Duncan (22-17-5)
25-year-old Parker (19-4-6)
36-year-old Bowen (7-1-1)
34-year-old Finley (6-2-1)
32-year-old Oberto (3-3-1)
best off the bench? 36-year-old Barry, injured Ginobli, and Udoka.
Their 3rd-leading scorer was 36-year-old Brent Barry.
Their #2 and #3 big men were Oberto and Udoka.
They had to choose between an injured Ginobli and a 36-year-old Bowen to guard prime Kobe.
You think that THAT team was a Finals contender once Ginobli got hurt?
No team has won a chip with utter crap in 3/5 starting positions and the bench in your lifetime. And even their second "star" was a guy who didn't make the all-star team that year and had never made an All-NBA team in his life to that point.
You are REALLY overplaying the 2008 Spurs. They lost Horry and straight-up couldn't handle Ginobli's injury, plus just about everyone else on the roster was WAY too old. You do realize that they only won ONE playoff series in the next three years, right?
2009 they brought back the EXACT SAME roster plus Matt Bonner and Drew Gooden, and got wasted by the 6th-seed Mavs in the 1st round. That was the Mavs team that nearly got swept by the Nuggets in the next round. But they were title contenders!
2010 they got back a healthy Ginobli balling, also added Jefferson, Hill, and McDyess, and got SWEPT by the Suns in the 2nd round.
2011 with those same guys, lose to the 8th-seed Grizzlies in the first round.
But you know what? That same team, same core, managed to win 20 straight late in 2012 and nearly make the NBA Finals, come within one shot of winning the chip in 2013, and then win the championship in dominating fashion in 2014, without adding a single all-star, even though all their stars were much older by that point.
That's what happens when you finally fill out a team with the right role players.
Your dumb ass keeps saying, "But the 2008 Spurs!" as if they could do anything with a hurt Ginobli when they were embarking on a 4 out of 5 losing streak in playoff series over the next four years even WITH Ginobli for 3/5 of those. If that team was all that, then where the hell did they go?
Of course, you can't explain that shyt, because you didn't even know that shyt. You'll just keep yelling, "2008 Spurs!" as if 2008 Duncan and Parker could win a ring playing 2 on 5.
Who was guarding Finley and Bowen that series
Bowen stopped being a defensive stopper just in time for you to help your argument
The Spurs struggled for a time in the playoffs hmmm... in the WEST
I'm sure they would've found it tougher in the east
...
What were the ages of Pierce, KG and Ray when they were together
The Spurs struggled for a time in the playoffs hmmm... in the WEST
I'm sure they would've found it tougher in the east
Is your skull so dense that you haven't figured out yet that I NEVER have compared the West to the East once this discussion?
Like I told you in the previous post, for true championship contenders, conference is barely relevant because you only play 1-2 other contenders from your own conference, then have to play the top team from the other conference.
Sure, the West is tough, but how many good teams did the Warriors have to beat to reach the Finals in 2016? How about 2015? How about the Spurs in 2014? Or 2013? And on and on and on. You play 1-2 good teams from your own conference and 1 good team from the other conference. Overall, which conference you are in is barely even relevant to whether you win the chip if you truly are a championship team.
If you think hawks would be favored against any Spurs team since Duncan you don't know shyt about basketball
Who was guarding Finley and Bowen that series
Finley already was mediocre as hell all playoffs long. And Bowen was never good on offense even in his prime. Bowen/Finley averaged 7.9ppg in the first round on 36% shooting. (against the no-defense Suns)
Bowen/Finley averaged 16.2ppg in the second round on 40% shooting. (against the Hornets with Morris Peterson and Jannero Pargo)
Bowen/Finley averaged 13.0ppg against the Lakers on 43% shooting. (against Kobe)
Damn, trying to brag about Kobe's defense on those two backfired on ya there.
Better move dem goalposts fast!The Spurs only had 2 decent players after Horry (their 3rd big man) went out and Ginobli (their leading scorer) got hurt. They weren't going to beat anyone at that point.
Bowen stopped being a defensive stopper just in time for you to help your argument
Just in time? When the hell was the last time you saw Bowen stop someone in a playoff series? He had BEEN done being a defensive stopper long before he got to those WCF. I'd love for you to try to name the last guy he stopped. He didn't stop anyone in the playoffs that year.
Bowen was an <i>aging</i> placeholder at guard who they had to lean on only because Ginobli was hurting and the Spurs had literally no one else.
What were the ages of Pierce, KG and Ray when they were together
They were 30, 31, and 32 the year they came together and won a chip.
They were 34, 35, and 36 the last year they were even relevant, but that was ONLY because Rondo had become a dominating force and the best player on the team. The three of them had gone from superstars to role players by that point.
You're going to compare that to the drop-off for Bowen, Barry, and Finley, who were 36, 36, and 34 and who weren't even stars in their prime?
Whasup pimp?
Is your skull so dense that you haven't figured out yet that I NEVER have compared the West to the East once this discussion?
Like I told you in the previous post, for true championship contenders, conference is barely relevant because you only play 1-2 other contenders from your own conference, then have to play the top team from the other conference.
Sure, the West is tough, but how many good teams did the Warriors have to beat to reach the Finals in 2016? How about 2015? How about the Spurs in 2014? Or 2013? And on and on and on. You play 1-2 good teams from your own conference and 1 good team from the other conference. Overall, which conference you are in is barely even relevant to whether you win the chip if you truly are a championship team.
Bowen/Finley averaged 7.9ppg in the first round on 36% shooting. (against the no-defense Suns)
Bowen/Finley averaged 16.2ppg in the second round on 40% shooting. (against the Hornets with Morris Peterson and Jannero Pargo)
Bowen/Finley averaged 13.0ppg against the Lakers on 43% shooting. (against Kobe)
Damn, trying to brag about Kobe's defense on those two backfired on ya there.
The Spurs only had 2 decent players after Horry (their 3rd big man) went out and Ginobli (their leading scorer) got hurt. They weren't going to beat anyone at that point.
Just in time? When the hell was the last time you saw Bowen stop someone in a playoff series? He had BEEN done being a defensive stopper long before he got to those WCF. I'd love for you to try to name the last guy he stopped. He didn't stop anyone in the playoffs that year.
Bowen was an <i>aging</i> placeholder at guard who they had to lean on only because Ginobli was hurting and the Spurs had literally no one else.
They were 30, 31, and 32 the year they came together and won a chip.
They were 34, 35, and 36 the last year they were even relevant, but that was ONLY because Rondo had become a dominating force and the best player on the team. The three of them had gone from superstars to role players by that point.
You're going to compare that to the drop-off for Bowen, Barry, and Finley, who were 36, 36, and 34 and who weren't even stars in their prime?
http://i300.photobucket.com/albums/nn25/jwebbxsjado/shut-the-fukk-up_o_GIFSoupcom.gif
So, still waiting for you to give me your random-ass made-up criteria that has Kobe with twice as many game-winners as Lebron. You ready with that yet?
I already gave you the standard criteria - less than 24 seconds left, shot to tie or lead.
Lebron's made 40 in 13 years, Kobe's made 55 in 20 years. Lebron's rate and %'s are better.
You want to make up a new criteria? How about it only counts if it's to take the lead and they win the game?
Then Lebron has 23 in 13 years, Kobe has 30 in 20 years. Lebron's rate and % still both better.
Okay, you don't like that one....how about shot to win with just 5 seconds or less left?
Lebron has 12 in 13 years, Kobe has 18 in 20 years. Lebron's rate and % still slightly better.
Maybe last 2 seconds is better for you?
Lebron has 10 in 13 years, Kobe has 11 in 20 years. Looking worse again for Kobe now.
Okay, maybe final second...
Lebron has 9 of those in 13 years, Kobe has 10 in 20 years. That's not even close, Lebron is destroying Kobe's pace and his % is better too.
Sorry Sccit....any way you cut it, Lebron hits game-winners at a higher rate and with a better % than Kobe ever did.
And you don't even want to rework those numbers for the playoffs, because Lebron's numbers kick Kobe's ass there.
Final 24 seconds to lead to tie, Lebron is already up 8 to 7 in far fewer seasons and attempts (8-23 now compared to Kobe's 7-28).
Final 5 seconds and to win, Lebron is up 5 to 2. Lebron 5-12, Kobe 2-12.
4 to 1 in final second. Lebron 4-7, Kobe 1-4.
All from Basketball Reference's shot-finder, plus a tiny bit of additional research to cover Kobe's first 3 seasons (not that they help his case).
So, I'm guessing that you have a problem with actual counting or division?
Are you just going to post another picture? Or maybe a youtube video that counts Kobe shots made with 30 seconds left as "game-winners".
You lost and have no comeback that actually counts, because the real numbers are
for your guy....just like your posting.
Last edited:
LOL THIS NERD REALLY THINKS HE DOIN SOMETHIN CUZ HE HOARDS A BUNCHA RANDOM HAND PICKED DATA TO MAKE HIS GAY CRUSH LOOK BETTER THAN HE ACTUALLY IS .. ITS GOTA BE ONE OF THE MOST PATHETIC DISPLAYS OF GROUPIEISM IVE EVER SEEN
EXCUSE ME FOR THE INVALID LINK, ROBO .. HERE U GO
EXCUSE ME FOR THE INVALID LINK, ROBO .. HERE U GO
LOL THIS NERD REALLY THINKS HE DOIN SOMETHIN CUZ HE HOARDS A BUNCHA RANDOM HAND PICKED DATA TO MAKE HIS GAY CRUSH LOOK BETTER THAN HE ACTUALLY IS .. ITS GOTA BE ONE OF THE MOST PATHETIC DISPLAYS OF GROUPIEISM IVE EVER SEEN
EXCUSE ME FOR THE INVALID LINK, ROBO .. HERE U GO
Hand-picked data?
I gave you every possible combination you could justify and NONE of them put Kobe ahead.
Whether it's "shots to lead or tie" or only "shots to win", Lebron comes out ahead.
Whether you count by 24 seconds left, 5 seconds left, 2 seconds left, 1 second left, or buzzer-beaters, Lebron comes out ahead.
Whether you count all shots, or playoffs only, Lebron comes out ahead.
If my data is "hand-picked" like your "Look, Lebron had one bad three-season stretch!", then prove it. Show me the real numbers.
Otherwise, it's obvious that you can only respond with STFU and gay jokes because your argument has been destroyed on every level.
(And damn, Sccit, you fall back on gay jokes a hell of lot. That's like the third or fourth time this thread alone. You might want to do some introspection and see if you got some projection going on here.)
But go ahead and most more competing youtube videos and pretty pictures to prove your case. At least you've admitted that you're trying for that WPOY this time.
