OFFICIAL NBA 2017-2018 Off-Season Thread

Which Kobe was better

  • No. 8

    Votes: 29 49.2%
  • No. 24

    Votes: 30 50.8%

  • Total voters
    59
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
2A9E01B3-BC31-4A1D-A1F5-9D7087B1973C.jpeg


@VARNELL HILL @wavycrocket @Vincent Van Goat

:nerd::nerd::nerd:

Damn.
 
Just according to the nerds on here and their eye tests as well I guess. He's the best ever.

It's funny to see dudes now say "it's a different era". When in the past they knock AI or Kobe for not shooting 48 - 50% and when somebody tells them the league is softer now, the pace is way faster, they get offended.

A lot of moonwalking in here today boy. :lol:
 
Projection purposes? Rookie numbers are terrible for predicting a career arc. They're mostly BS :lol:

It's a better comparison because it helps his narrative :lol: This man has to work for ESPN with the way he manipulates numbers :lol:

How are rookie numbers terrible for projecting? U gave 1 example with MCW. MCW was 22 and he never that good, he only won ROY b/c that was one of the worst rookie clases of all time.

Of course one year never tells the story, but 18/19 year olds putting up numbers like Lonzo is hella impressive and Lonzo's only gunna get better. If he was 22 putting up these numbers I would be less enthused. But he's not.

What numbers am I manipulating? I literally posted Kidd and Lonzo's rookie year numbers and didn't say a thing. I let the numbers do the talking :lol:
 
Last edited:
It's funny to see dudes now say "it's a different era". When in the past they knock AI or Kobe for not shooting 48 - 50% and when somebody tells them the league is softer now, the pace is way faster, they get offended.

A lot of moonwalking in here today boy. :lol:


Look at AI and Kobe's efficiency adjusted for league average at their time. AI efficiency was well below average and Kobe's was merely average.
 
Look at AI and Kobe's efficiency adjusted for league average at their time. AI efficiency was well below average and Kobe's was merely average.

so now efficiency matters, but when I post Lonzo/Kidd stats its "that was a different era".

SOMETHING NOT ADDING UP.
 
Kidd is a HOFer because of what he did during his career, not his rookie year.
MCW had a better rookie year than Kobe. He's clearly not making the HOF.

Well considering MCW & Kobe are NOTHING alike or had the same strengths coming out of college that would be pointless

Both Kidd & Lonzo have comparable strengths, Big Pg's with elite passing ability, great on the break, Athletic. Praised for their high BB IQ's & both streaky shooters. While pace may impact his stats a bit it's clear that Him & Kidd have performed almost identically coming into the league. Kidd continued to build on those core skills & didn't become a reliable shooter into well in his career. Zo already seems to have him beat in long range shooting, while Kid was a better handler & finisher.

The point of the post was to state that Zo is off to a strong start & a player with his skillset was REMARKABLY useful in his career.
 
Just because it's a different era doesn't mean a player can't be extremely effective or flourish playing a different style. Not just talking about Zo either. Simmons hasn't made a 3 all season long and look at how great he is. Not everybody will conform to the cookie cutter mold you nerds want to see.

Got dudes lamenting Zo for not taking midrange shots early on while simultaneously saying the midrange is the worst shot in basketball. Is it oochie wally or one mic?
 
Look at AI and Kobe's efficiency adjusted for league average at their time. AI efficiency was well below average and Kobe's was merely average.

AI's efficiency was low because he was getting knocked around A LOT. He was a lil dude being guarded by bigger players that could actually play defense and touch him. Kobe's was good for that era. PG's and SG's wasn't shooting 48+ from the field or 38+ from 3 cuz the defense was better, rules were different.

But this doesn't come up when people in here want to hype somebody from this era. Dudes usually will just throw out a comparison with no context.
 
AI's efficiency was low because he was getting knocked around A LOT. He was a lil dude being guarded by bigger players that could actually play defense and touch him. Kobe's was good for that era. PG's and SG's wasn't shooting 48+ from the field or 38+ from 3 cuz the defense was better, rules were different.

But this doesn't come up when people in here want to hype somebody from this era. Dudes usually will just throw out a comparison with no context.


I'm speaking in terms of efficiency not FG%
 
I tried to tell you guys man. Team got worse from last year and no KL

The gift and curse of coach Pop. That roster is beyond trash, but year after year he gets the most out of his guys. Any other coach and that roster without Kawhi will land u a top 10 pick.
 
Last 3 Games:
Russ Stans: 34.3 PPG, 12 RPG, 7 APG #MyMVP

Everybody else: 26.7 FGA, 48% FG%, 6 TOs PG #NotMyMVP

Pick your stats not only wisely, but most importantly selectively fellas

Only on NT can someone average 34, 12 & 7 on 48% shooting with his team winning 2/3 games (two of those won in the last seconds by that same player) & be looked at as a detriment :lol:
 
I want the lakers to be good the nba is better when the lakers are good I hope lonzo becomes a star

I never understood this “nba is better when the lakers are good” logic (heard this from multiple people including espn)..lakers been trash for a minute now and the nba has never been better. Resurgence of the “big man,” young cores every where, and increasing parity in competition. Look, im a fan of lonzo and kuz but short of landing lebron in FA, the lakers’ being good doesn’t mean **** for the rest of the nba landscape
 
  • Like
Reactions: OTG
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom