The Battle Bar, Our Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy

Started by Jmanghan3,287 pages

I overreacted.

I retract my previous statement. 😆

👆

Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
@DC, I forgot to respond to your PM:

Ahh, I have pretty much the same, except I have Kobe > Bird, simply because the mamba had, like, 5-7 extra years on Bird where he could have won as the 1-2 best player on a team with the sufficient amount of talent.

Pound for Pound, however, Bird is better though, not doubting that. It's quality vs quantity, but in this case, a peak Kobe isn't too far from a peak Larry as players, while the extra years of greatness Kobe has is enough for me to give him the edge over The Legend.

Deronn; I made the thing for that tournament thingy...

Are we still doing that, BTW? I never know with you.

Originally posted by Deronn_solo
Ahh, I have pretty much the same, except I have Kobe > Bird, simply because the mamba had, like, 5-7 extra years on Bird where he could have won as the 1-2 best player on a team with the sufficient amount of talent.

Pound for Pound, however, Bird is better though, not doubting that. It's quality vs quantity, but in this case, a peak Kobe isn't too far from a peak Larry as players, while the extra years of greatness Kobe has is enough for me to give him the edge over The Legend.

Fair enough.

I have Bird above because he's a better all-around player, won 2 more MVP's in an era that had arguably the greatest allotment of superstars ever, and was simply a winner, (the year before bird's rookie year, they went 29-53. His rookie year, they went 61-21.)

Quality stuff right there indeed. If Bird hadn't blew out his back, he's be top 5, easy. Maybe even top 3, tbh.

Do you think any of the new guys saying now [Steph, Harden, Westbrook] has any chance at all at cracking the top 10?

Originally posted by MythLord
Deronn; I made the thing for that tournament thingy...

Are we still doing that, BTW? I never know with you.

Oh, I'm in. Looking at the frankly mediocre opposition, it shouldn't take much to win anyway, lal.

Originally posted by Deronn_solo
Quality stuff right there indeed. If Bird hadn't blew out his back, he's be top 5, easy. Maybe even top 3, tbh.

Do you think any of the new guys saying now [Steph, Harden, Westbrook] has any chance at all at cracking the top 10?

🙂

Durant could. Dude is the clear best player on his team, and they'll probably ring off at least 2-3 championships. Curry? Maybe. Westbrook and Harden? Hell nah.

Anthony Davis could if his team stops sucking.

Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
Fair enough.

I have Bird above because he's a better all-around player, won 2 more MVP's in an era that had arguably the greatest allotment of superstars ever, and was simply a winner, (the year before bird's rookie year, they went 29-53. His rookie year, they went 61-21.)

Kobe could've gotten 2-3 more MPV is if he has a better team in his prime. It's pretty weird to have team success affect an individual award tbh...

Kobe did not deserve it any of those years. Except MAYBE 06. 👆

Neither did Nash, though.

Bucketball. 🙂

2006 was an absolute travesty.

Kobe should have won that hands down. The man carried a team that would otherwise win, 20, or fewer games [Smush Parker and Kwame Brown and Chris Mihm, lmao], to nearly 50 wins.

Plus, that 35-5-5 stat line....

Hell, Kobe shouldn't have even won the MVP in '08. Chris Paul put up better stats on a worse team and led them to virtually the same record, (Kobe's Lakers won merely one game more than Paul's Hornets).

Originally posted by Deronn_solo
2006 was an absolute travesty.

Kobe should have won that hands down. The man carried a team that would otherwise win, 20, or fewer games [Slush Parker and Kwame Brown and Chris Mihm, lmao], to nearly 50 wins.

Plus, that 35-5-5 stat line....

I mean, sure, but what about Lebron's 31-7-7 on more efficient shooting that led to a 50-32 season? (As opposed to Kobe's 45-37 Lakers)? Or Dirk's 27-9 on awesomely efficient shooting that led his Mavericks to a 60-22 record?

Well, playing in the East kinda dampens the 5 game difference between LeBron and Kobe, given the West had far more powerhouse [Spurs, Suns, Mags, etc] nor do I think LeBron was the defensive player Kobe was at that point in time.

As for Dirk, he had a better team than both. Kobe and LeBron were really the only people worthwhile on their team offensively, while Dirk had JT, Josh Howard, and so on.

I mean E. Snow and Smush Parker were the starting PG's, like, holy ****.

And the East was toting the Pistons (who had the best record in the league that year,) the Heat, (who won the championship,) and the Nets, (a team that was possession of both Jason Kidd and Vince Carter).

Which is indicative of a much better record, yeah. In conjunction with the fact that Dirk was the driving force of said record by a long shot, I'd say he had as much of a claim for MVP as anybody.

Which is fair, but so you think the East was >= the West or nah?

As long as we agree Nash didn't deserve it, that's good enough for me, lal.

I think that the West was slightly better, but not by enough that it definitively propels Kobe's season over Lebron's.

Yeah, I think Duncan, Kobe, Lebron, Wade, Dirk, etc all deserved it over Nash. I'm just not of the opinion that Kobe deserved any of the MVPs that zoltan highlighted above.

Why not?