OT: NBA 2005-2006 Season Discussion
Moderators: Bill_Abner, ScoopBrady
-
dbdynsty25
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 21616
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2002 3:00 am
- Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
I guess we'll find out now since we've just lost Larry Hughes for two months.EZSnappin wrote:I wonder if injuries had hit the Cav's big two like in Houston how they would do.So are the Cavs underacheiving or the depleted Rockets overacheiving?
But I don't think the Cavs have underachieved so far this season. The lack of effort on defense has been disappointing, but 19-10, second-best record in the East, I'll take that. It's just too bad Detroit's in the same division, the fourth seed might be as high as we can hope for.
The Cavs will be very lucky to stay in the fourth seed without Hughes and a six-game west coast trip starting next week. I hope this isn't the start of another nose-dive like last year.
Nice road win at Milwaukee last night though. Another triple-double for LeBron.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/s ... id=2278847
Decent little puff piece on Lebron. I like the mention of Penny (who was amazing his first few years in orlando) and found the Kobe quote interesting.....Wonder if that was honesty or just nike promotion.
Decent little puff piece on Lebron. I like the mention of Penny (who was amazing his first few years in orlando) and found the Kobe quote interesting.....Wonder if that was honesty or just nike promotion.
http://www.whas11.com/sharedcontent/VideoPlayer/videoPlayer.php?vidId=49293&catId=49
---Lend a ***** a pencil--- Context?
---Lend a ***** a pencil--- Context?
Nice link.reeche wrote:http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/s ... id=2278847
Decent little puff piece on Lebron. I like the mention of Penny (who was amazing his first few years in orlando) and found the Kobe quote interesting.....Wonder if that was honesty or just nike promotion.
LeBron's amazing. Talk about a kid that's got it all together. No ego. Total respect for the game and it's history. Puts team goals ahead of his personal achievements.
And the thing that amazes the most is that under all of this constant scrutiny he NEVER slips up, he ALWAYS says the right thing. His image is so sqeaky clean it's almost unbelievable.
And I doubt that it's the NBA, Nike or the media just portraying him that way. You know it's just the opposite when it comes to the media. They're just waiting for him to slip up somehow so they can pounce. They've been trying to uncover skeletons in his closet since his high school days. Yet he just keeps skating by unscathed. I don't get it.
My favorite line from that article:
"I want to stay with the Cavs and build a champion. And I feel like we're on our way."
What the heck's wrong with this kid?!?!?! NOBODY wants to stay in Cleveland.
It's now been 42 years since we've won anything in this town. This kid's definitely the light at the end of a very long tunnel.
-
dbdynsty25
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 21616
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2002 3:00 am
- Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
Did anyone see the V. Carter-M. Peterson incident in teh TOR-NJ tilt? The game had the intensity of a playoff atmosphere all built up with the return of V. Carter to Toronto.
Carter jokingly slapped Peterson during play, who was one of Carter's best friends in his six-plus years for the Raptors. Peterson reached out and hit Carter with a slap to the face, resulting in his second technical and subsequent ejection - he'd just received a technical for arguing a non-call.
The two were just competitively mouthing each other and the ref blew the call. In the end Peterson had to be restrained by his teammates and Carter scores a highreel fallaway jump with 0.1 sec left in the game beating TO 105-104.
Carter jokingly slapped Peterson during play, who was one of Carter's best friends in his six-plus years for the Raptors. Peterson reached out and hit Carter with a slap to the face, resulting in his second technical and subsequent ejection - he'd just received a technical for arguing a non-call.
The two were just competitively mouthing each other and the ref blew the call. In the end Peterson had to be restrained by his teammates and Carter scores a highreel fallaway jump with 0.1 sec left in the game beating TO 105-104.
-
dbdynsty25
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 21616
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2002 3:00 am
- Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
This is amusing from John Hollinger on ESPN:
Mention the Phoenix Suns to anyone who follows the NBA, and the first words that come to mind are all about offense: running and gunning, 3-point shooting, slick passing and alley-oops. Just in case that image wasn't already cemented in our heads, the Suns went out and hung 47 on Miami in the first quarter of Friday's ESPN game against the Heat.
Dig a little deeper, however, and you'll discover something different: Defense, not offense, is what's carrying the Suns so far.
That's a surprise if you look only at per-game scoring stats.
The Suns are the league's highest-scoring team at 104.0 points per game, nearly two points ahead of their closest competitor. But in terms of points allowed, they rank only 16th at 96.9 per game. Clearly, one would think, the Suns had hardly changed their stripes from the score-first-ask-questions-later approach of a year ago.
However, that analysis ignores a very important fact: Phoenix games feature more possessions for each team than typical NBA contests. Because Steve Nash is pushing the ball up court so quickly and the other Suns are so ready to launch it, the average Suns game has an estimated 98.2 possessions for each team.
I know that from a statistic I use called Pace Factor, which measures how many possessions a team uses per 48 minutes. And it turns out that Phoenix leads the league in that department by a wide margin, using about five extra possessions per game compared to the average team.
Because of that, we should expect Phoenix's stats to be inflated. In any given game, those five extra possessions provide five more chances for each team to score, explaining why the score of a typical Suns game is so much higher than it is for the rest of the league.
It also means we have to adjust our perceptions of the Suns on both sides of the ball. Offensively, because of their blazing fast pace, they may not be quite as good as their gaudy points-per-game average makes things appear. And defensively, because their opponents get more opportunities, the Suns could be substantially better than their per-game average shows.
Fortunately, we have a simple way of making that adjustment. I keep track of two statistics called Offensive Efficiency and Defensive Efficiency that eliminate the impact of pace by measuring points scored and points allowed per 100 possessions. By doing so, it allows us to make apples-to-apples comparisons of fast-paced teams like Phoenix with plodders like Indiana or Detroit.
And once we make the adjustment, the results might raise a few eyebrows. The Suns still are a quality offensive team -- they rank seventh in the league in Offensive Efficiency through Monday's games. (Incidentally, all these rankings are now available to ESPN Insiders.) But defensively, they're even better, ranking second overall in the league -- barely behind No. 1 San Antonio and well ahead of third-ranked Indiana.
Since this conclusion flies so completely in the face of conventional wisdom, let me introduce a few numbers to back up my contention. For starters, the Suns are fifth in the league in opponent field-goal percentage at 43.1 percent. But that number looks a lot better once you consider how rarely Phoenix's opponents get freebies: Per opponent field-goal attempt, the Suns give up fewer free-throw attempts than any team except Detroit.
Thus, while the Suns may not fit our stereotype of a physical, grind-it-out defensive team, they have defended better than 28 of the other 29 teams in 2005-06.
Phoenix's example covers one end of the pace spectrum, but there's an equally compelling story among slow-paced clubs, because a team we associate with grind-it-out defense has been a mirror image of the Suns this season, also in unexpected ways.
The Detroit Pistons won a championship and came within a whisker of a second behind a suffocating defense, and at first glance you might think little had changed this year. The Pistons allow only 91.7 points per game, ranking them seventh in the league in that category, while their offensive average of 99.3 points is "only" ninth.
But evaluating Detroit has the opposite problem that we discussed with evaluating Phoenix: The Pistons walk it up the court nearly every possession and routinely grind the clock down to single digits before shooting.
As a result, the Pistons are the league's second slowest-paced team at 88.6 possessions per game -- only Memphis is slower. And looking at the league Pace Factor standings, you'll see that they use nearly 10 possessions per game fewer than the Suns.
Considering that information, it's hardly surprising that Phoenix's per-game averages of points scored and points allowed are so much greater than Detroit's. Only by evaluating these teams on a per-possession basis, using Offensive and Defensive Efficiency, can we make a relevant comparison between the two teams.
And once we do, we reach a surprising conclusion -- the Pistons are a better offensive team than the Suns. In fact, they're better than everybody. Detroit averages an amazing 110.1 points per 100 possessions, more than two points better than their closest rivals, Cleveland and Dallas.
Similarly, Detroit's vaunted defense appears to have taken a step back. The Pistons rank a surprisingly poor 16th in Defensive Efficiency, below even the Charlotte Bobcats.
Again, this might be shocking given the Pistons' reputation, but the numbers don't lie. Detroit has suffered from a puzzling inability to cover the defensive boards -- only Portland is worse in Defensive Rebound Rate -- and their opponent field-goal percentage of 44.8 percent barely beats the league average of 45.0 percent.
So for the first 30 games, at least, our stereotypes have been turned on their heads.
The plodding, grind-it-out Pistons actually have used an unstoppable offensive attack to help cover for a mediocre defense, while the blazing fast Suns are the ones winning with a suffocating defense. It's almost as if the two franchises switched rosters and decided not to tell anybody.
But thanks to tools like Pace Factor, Offensive Efficiency and Defensive Efficiency, we can easily spot the trends that, in many cases, simple per-game averages mask.
In this case, it means we should think again about who the league's defensive and offensive stalwarts are, because it's the opposite of what we've been led to believe.
Mention the Phoenix Suns to anyone who follows the NBA, and the first words that come to mind are all about offense: running and gunning, 3-point shooting, slick passing and alley-oops. Just in case that image wasn't already cemented in our heads, the Suns went out and hung 47 on Miami in the first quarter of Friday's ESPN game against the Heat.
Dig a little deeper, however, and you'll discover something different: Defense, not offense, is what's carrying the Suns so far.
That's a surprise if you look only at per-game scoring stats.
The Suns are the league's highest-scoring team at 104.0 points per game, nearly two points ahead of their closest competitor. But in terms of points allowed, they rank only 16th at 96.9 per game. Clearly, one would think, the Suns had hardly changed their stripes from the score-first-ask-questions-later approach of a year ago.
However, that analysis ignores a very important fact: Phoenix games feature more possessions for each team than typical NBA contests. Because Steve Nash is pushing the ball up court so quickly and the other Suns are so ready to launch it, the average Suns game has an estimated 98.2 possessions for each team.
I know that from a statistic I use called Pace Factor, which measures how many possessions a team uses per 48 minutes. And it turns out that Phoenix leads the league in that department by a wide margin, using about five extra possessions per game compared to the average team.
Because of that, we should expect Phoenix's stats to be inflated. In any given game, those five extra possessions provide five more chances for each team to score, explaining why the score of a typical Suns game is so much higher than it is for the rest of the league.
It also means we have to adjust our perceptions of the Suns on both sides of the ball. Offensively, because of their blazing fast pace, they may not be quite as good as their gaudy points-per-game average makes things appear. And defensively, because their opponents get more opportunities, the Suns could be substantially better than their per-game average shows.
Fortunately, we have a simple way of making that adjustment. I keep track of two statistics called Offensive Efficiency and Defensive Efficiency that eliminate the impact of pace by measuring points scored and points allowed per 100 possessions. By doing so, it allows us to make apples-to-apples comparisons of fast-paced teams like Phoenix with plodders like Indiana or Detroit.
And once we make the adjustment, the results might raise a few eyebrows. The Suns still are a quality offensive team -- they rank seventh in the league in Offensive Efficiency through Monday's games. (Incidentally, all these rankings are now available to ESPN Insiders.) But defensively, they're even better, ranking second overall in the league -- barely behind No. 1 San Antonio and well ahead of third-ranked Indiana.
Since this conclusion flies so completely in the face of conventional wisdom, let me introduce a few numbers to back up my contention. For starters, the Suns are fifth in the league in opponent field-goal percentage at 43.1 percent. But that number looks a lot better once you consider how rarely Phoenix's opponents get freebies: Per opponent field-goal attempt, the Suns give up fewer free-throw attempts than any team except Detroit.
Thus, while the Suns may not fit our stereotype of a physical, grind-it-out defensive team, they have defended better than 28 of the other 29 teams in 2005-06.
Phoenix's example covers one end of the pace spectrum, but there's an equally compelling story among slow-paced clubs, because a team we associate with grind-it-out defense has been a mirror image of the Suns this season, also in unexpected ways.
The Detroit Pistons won a championship and came within a whisker of a second behind a suffocating defense, and at first glance you might think little had changed this year. The Pistons allow only 91.7 points per game, ranking them seventh in the league in that category, while their offensive average of 99.3 points is "only" ninth.
But evaluating Detroit has the opposite problem that we discussed with evaluating Phoenix: The Pistons walk it up the court nearly every possession and routinely grind the clock down to single digits before shooting.
As a result, the Pistons are the league's second slowest-paced team at 88.6 possessions per game -- only Memphis is slower. And looking at the league Pace Factor standings, you'll see that they use nearly 10 possessions per game fewer than the Suns.
Considering that information, it's hardly surprising that Phoenix's per-game averages of points scored and points allowed are so much greater than Detroit's. Only by evaluating these teams on a per-possession basis, using Offensive and Defensive Efficiency, can we make a relevant comparison between the two teams.
And once we do, we reach a surprising conclusion -- the Pistons are a better offensive team than the Suns. In fact, they're better than everybody. Detroit averages an amazing 110.1 points per 100 possessions, more than two points better than their closest rivals, Cleveland and Dallas.
Similarly, Detroit's vaunted defense appears to have taken a step back. The Pistons rank a surprisingly poor 16th in Defensive Efficiency, below even the Charlotte Bobcats.
Again, this might be shocking given the Pistons' reputation, but the numbers don't lie. Detroit has suffered from a puzzling inability to cover the defensive boards -- only Portland is worse in Defensive Rebound Rate -- and their opponent field-goal percentage of 44.8 percent barely beats the league average of 45.0 percent.
So for the first 30 games, at least, our stereotypes have been turned on their heads.
The plodding, grind-it-out Pistons actually have used an unstoppable offensive attack to help cover for a mediocre defense, while the blazing fast Suns are the ones winning with a suffocating defense. It's almost as if the two franchises switched rosters and decided not to tell anybody.
But thanks to tools like Pace Factor, Offensive Efficiency and Defensive Efficiency, we can easily spot the trends that, in many cases, simple per-game averages mask.
In this case, it means we should think again about who the league's defensive and offensive stalwarts are, because it's the opposite of what we've been led to believe.
Man, sometimes I think John Hollinger goes too far with judging teams solely by numbers and his faulty efficiency ratings. Yeah, the Pistons haven't been as good overall defensively this year in comparison to past couple seasons. But that doesn't mean they're mediocre. A lot of it has to do with them pushing the ball up the court more and opposing teams pushing it right back at them to avoid facing the Pistons set halfcourt defense. The Pistons are just as stingy as they ever been when they go into lockdown mode late in games. Has he even watched any Piston games lately?
And the Pistons team rebounding statistic is way overblown. Of course team rebounding is going to suffer some when you regularly spread the floor with your bigs, having one of the best rebounders on the team often shooting 3s (Rasheed Wallace) and/or often shooting elbow/wing jumpers from Pick & Pop plays (Antonio McDyess). This is a far cry from what kind of play sets Larry Brown and Rick Carlisle like to call, since they like the team packing the lane and crashing the boards after every shot on both ends of the floor. Common sense says it's not easy for one to fight for boards if he's standing 15 feet or further away from the basket. When other guys are taking shots on the team and/or other plays are called, the Pistons still rebound just as well as any team in the league.
Kruza
And the Pistons team rebounding statistic is way overblown. Of course team rebounding is going to suffer some when you regularly spread the floor with your bigs, having one of the best rebounders on the team often shooting 3s (Rasheed Wallace) and/or often shooting elbow/wing jumpers from Pick & Pop plays (Antonio McDyess). This is a far cry from what kind of play sets Larry Brown and Rick Carlisle like to call, since they like the team packing the lane and crashing the boards after every shot on both ends of the floor. Common sense says it's not easy for one to fight for boards if he's standing 15 feet or further away from the basket. When other guys are taking shots on the team and/or other plays are called, the Pistons still rebound just as well as any team in the league.
Kruza
Last edited by Kruza on Fri Jan 13, 2006 9:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
I agree......He does make interesting reading though.Kruza wrote:Man, sometimes I think John Hollinger goes too far with judging teams solely by numbers and his faulty efficiency ratings.
http://www.whas11.com/sharedcontent/VideoPlayer/videoPlayer.php?vidId=49293&catId=49
---Lend a ***** a pencil--- Context?
---Lend a ***** a pencil--- Context?
-
ubrakto
- Utility Infielder
- Posts: 405
- Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2003 4:00 am
- Location: Indianapolis
- Contact:
Personally, I think the Pistons D is a classic case of a team that believes (not unjustifiably) that it can turn it on whenever they feel like it. I've only seen a handful of their games this year, but you can see it and it shows up when you read the recaps as well. Just about every team in the league can play them close for two or three quarters. A lot of weak opponents will roll up a bunch of points, etc. etc. Then the fourth rolls around the Pistons just slam the door. They're like Lucy taking the football away from Charlie Brown.
I don't know of such a resource, but if anyone does, it would be interesting to see what their opponents average per quarter from the 1st through the 4th. My bet is their offensive numbers drop considerably in the fourth.
---Todd
I don't know of such a resource, but if anyone does, it would be interesting to see what their opponents average per quarter from the 1st through the 4th. My bet is their offensive numbers drop considerably in the fourth.
---Todd
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... man/060111
Completely off topic but interesting none the less. All the bird comparisons always bug me also dating all the way back to Danny Ferry.
Completely off topic but interesting none the less. All the bird comparisons always bug me also dating all the way back to Danny Ferry.
http://www.whas11.com/sharedcontent/VideoPlayer/videoPlayer.php?vidId=49293&catId=49
---Lend a ***** a pencil--- Context?
---Lend a ***** a pencil--- Context?
Bird was 6-9. He was a legend for at least 2-3 years before Indiana State got a lot of coverage in his last year.
Morrison is getting the pub this year.
But Bird wasn't as central to the success of the Celtics the way Magic was to the Lakers. Without Parrish, McHale, DJ and some other key players, Bird doesn't have any rings.
Morrison is getting the pub this year.
But Bird wasn't as central to the success of the Celtics the way Magic was to the Lakers. Without Parrish, McHale, DJ and some other key players, Bird doesn't have any rings.
I think you're selling Worthy and Kareem incredibly short, as well as the likes of Byron Scott.wco81 wrote:But Bird wasn't as central to the success of the Celtics the way Magic was to the Lakers. Without Parrish, McHale, DJ and some other key players, Bird doesn't have any rings.
xbl/psn tag: dave2eleven
I'll disagree with that. Magic wasn't exactly playing with stiffs out there with Worthy, Scott, Kareem, Wilkes, etc.wco81 wrote:Bird was 6-9. He was a legend for at least 2-3 years before Indiana State got a lot of coverage in his last year.
Morrison is getting the pub this year.
But Bird wasn't as central to the success of the Celtics the way Magic was to the Lakers.
My problem with all the Bird comparisons is that bird was an excellent passer and could finish around the rim. Something all the "bird clones" from Ferry to Nowitzki tend to be deficient in.
EDIT: After thinking about it for a bit, the only two players that have seemed Larry Bird like to me in the least are Chris Mullin and Toni Kukoc. Mullin at his best wasn't quite bird but he was a damn good player and Kukoc had the across the board skills like Larry. He just wasn't nearly as dominant or aggressive with his game to have that kind of impact. Other than that most of the comparisons seem poor....I think you could make a closer case that Magic was more similar to Bird than some of the usual stiffs they tend to try to lump into that category.
http://www.slate.com/id/2132097/
Another similar article.
Last edited by reeche on Wed Jan 11, 2006 4:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.whas11.com/sharedcontent/VideoPlayer/videoPlayer.php?vidId=49293&catId=49
---Lend a ***** a pencil--- Context?
---Lend a ***** a pencil--- Context?
Magic made many of those players better. He gave them confidence, got many of them easy shots. He basically crafted the offense, even getting a coach fired because he wanted to keep Showtime. He could have just fed Kareem all the time and watched from the outside.
Even Kareem became a much better passer than he used to be, especially on the give and gos as Magic fed the post and cut to the basket, using his size advantage to get easy layups.
I'm not saying Bird wasn't a great player. His accomplishments speak for themselves.
But rather than look for the next Bird, maybe people should be looking for the next Magic.
Even Kareem became a much better passer than he used to be, especially on the give and gos as Magic fed the post and cut to the basket, using his size advantage to get easy layups.
I'm not saying Bird wasn't a great player. His accomplishments speak for themselves.
But rather than look for the next Bird, maybe people should be looking for the next Magic.
I think people should just look for the next great team player and that will solve most of your needs. I think looking for the "Next" Jordan, Bird, Magic, etc is futile. The sportsguy made an interesting point a while back. Basketball players (or the superstars at least) tend to very unique, maybe more so than other sports....wco81 wrote:But rather than look for the next Bird, maybe people should be looking for the next Magic.
The great NBA players tend to break the mold so it's sort of silly to look for the next anything. Lebron isn't Magic. He isn't Jordan. He isn't Bird. He's Lebron. His game is different even though he may remind some people at individual times or plays of all three.
http://www.whas11.com/sharedcontent/VideoPlayer/videoPlayer.php?vidId=49293&catId=49
---Lend a ***** a pencil--- Context?
---Lend a ***** a pencil--- Context?
Yeah, Magic, Jordan or Bird would have probably made both freethrows at the end of that game last night.reeche wrote: Lebron isn't Magic. He isn't Jordan. He isn't Bird. He's Lebron.
Not that I'm down on Lebron at all, but it was pretty obvious last night that he isn't quite as clutch as Kobe at this point in his career when the game is on the line.
It was still a great game though. It must have been, to keep me awake past 1 am.
-
WillHunting
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 1212
- Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 4:00 am
Anyone remember Kobe shooting those airball 3s against Utah in the playoffs? It was very early in his career.
But one thing is that Kobe has much sounder form on the jump shot.
In fact, the jumper was suppose to be one of Lebron's weaknesses so he's done a lot better than people expected.
It looked like he was looking to go to the hole but one of the Lakers' big men showed so he pulled up and didn't get off a good shot.
Maybe he should have gone anyways and force the refs to call either a charge or a blocking foul.
But one thing is that Kobe has much sounder form on the jump shot.
In fact, the jumper was suppose to be one of Lebron's weaknesses so he's done a lot better than people expected.
It looked like he was looking to go to the hole but one of the Lakers' big men showed so he pulled up and didn't get off a good shot.
Maybe he should have gone anyways and force the refs to call either a charge or a blocking foul.
He's an amazing scorer when he's focused....Although to be realistic, I think a good number of other players throughout history have been capable of putting up the numbers he has this year (meaning I still don't yet put Kobe in the top 5 of greats, although top 10 and rising at least right now doesn't seem so far-fetched).spooky157 wrote:Kobe goes for 81!!! He shot 28-46 from the field, including 7 threes, 18-20 from the line - just incredible. This stretch that he's had since coming off his suspension has been unbelievable.
Kobe just happens to play on a pretty awful team where he is the only guy capable of scoring consistenly (I'm looking at you Lamar Odom) and he has no one to really curtail his shot selection. Truthfully this was somewhat the way I expected him to play last year where instead he had a dissapointing year. Certainly making his case as the best player in the game now. Impressive performance but tempered slightly for me in that Phil Jackson has basically been castrated this year.
http://www.whas11.com/sharedcontent/VideoPlayer/videoPlayer.php?vidId=49293&catId=49
---Lend a ***** a pencil--- Context?
---Lend a ***** a pencil--- Context?
-
sfz_T-car
- DSP-Funk All-Star*
- Posts: 1071
- Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 3:00 am
- Location: Lower Haight, San Francisco
Say what you will about the Kobe & Phil show, but the Lakers would make the playoffs if the season ended today.
I don't like the idea of a guy, any guy, hoisting up an average of 28 SPG. But this gives the team the best chance of winning. They're a better team running an iso with Kobe hitting a ridiculous fadeaway, than to make eight passes and have Kwame Brown miss a five footer.
It doesn't take a genius to realize this so Jackson is with the program.
I don't like the idea of a guy, any guy, hoisting up an average of 28 SPG. But this gives the team the best chance of winning. They're a better team running an iso with Kobe hitting a ridiculous fadeaway, than to make eight passes and have Kwame Brown miss a five footer.
It doesn't take a genius to realize this so Jackson is with the program.
At this point, I think it's safe to say that with three championship rings, his big game track record and his obvious physical ability that he is one of the greatest shooting guards that ever lived. Where he ranks there is open for debate. As far as today's game goes, I think I still would rather have Duncan (although boy, is he looking prematurely creaky) but there's no doubt that on the offensive side of the ball, Kobe has best skill set right now.reeche wrote:He's an amazing scorer when he's focused....Although to be realistic, I think a good number of other players throughout history have been capable of putting up the numbers he has this year (meaning I still don't yet put Kobe in the top 5 of greats, although top 10 and rising at least right now doesn't seem so far-fetched).
"Whatever, I don't know why you even play yourself to that degree,
you laugh at me?" - Del
"Said the whisper to the secret..." - King's X
you laugh at me?" - Del
"Said the whisper to the secret..." - King's X
-
dbdynsty25
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 21616
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2002 3:00 am
- Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
As soon as he wins some big games without the most dominant big man in the last 20 years, maybe I'll agree with you. Hell...a playoff game without the big man would be a start.Kazuya wrote:At this point, I think it's safe to say that with three championship rings, his big game track record and his obvious physical ability that he is one of the greatest shooting guards that ever lived.