JNice

moTIGS:

To say stats mean absolutely nothing is ludicrous. Karl Malone probably will own the all-time scoring record, and what will that say about him.. well, he will probably be dabted as arguably the best PF of all-time, or at least the best scoring PF of all-time, including being considered one of the most durable, reliable, and consistent players of all-time.

I would argue that yes, Tracy is Orlando's <b>main</b> scoring option, but he was not their "only" scoring option. A team that avg'd the 4th best ppg in the NBA and Tmac was not scoring 80 ppg. Besides Shaq, who is considered a "scorer" on the Lakers? Almost nobody. On Orlando, many of Tmac's counterparts are strictly scorers.

And you say that Kobe in his system is made to pass the ball more, but wouldn't that lead you to believe he would have higher assists since all McGrady does is score? But he doesnt.

There is nothing else at this point to talk about in the NBA. And this is the first time that anyone has really ever argued this with real stats behind the argument. If you don't wanna read anymore about Tmac and Kobe, then dont read the thread.

kflo:

This will never be decided head to head. At least not for quite some time. Unless Orlando and LA were to matchup in the playoffs, and LA without Shaq, it would never be about Kobe vs Tmac.. as long as Shaq is around, it is his team. Not to mention it seems these days coaches won't put marquee players on each other until the end of games to avoid foul trouble.

You are right about not discounting other players.. Paul Pierce has a shot at being in this discussion if he keeps his pace up. If KG ever turns it up a notch, he could be as well. If Lebron James lives up to his hype, he is another.

__________________
MC Hammer once said "You can't touch this!" I am THIS.

truebluefan

this never ending argument may change this year. If Hill is 100% and Tracys stats go down. Will the discussion still be the same?

Dragnsmke1

Fellas...The whole point of team sports is that it is situational. Kobe is in a situation that makes him better than T-Mac. Dont get me wrong I love T-mac and I despise Kobe, but thats just opinion. Whenit comes down to it the hall of fame judges you by rings and then by stats.
Why do you think players like Charles Barkley shop themselves around at the end of thier careers trying to get that ring?

__________________
All Or Nothing

kflo

i agree that stats do mean something. they definitely support a players greatness. great players usually have the stats to back them up. but there's that extra something that separates the true greats. hakeem and robinson's stats were pretty comparable in their heydays. but hakeem just had that extra level robinson didn't have. it's not really something that was there in the stats.

on assists, jordan's assists went down with his scoring as his team got better. the more he was asked to share the ball, the more it affected his stats overall. but he too always had that extra level that the stats didn't necessarily show (although he was always leading the league in scoring).

as for head to head, we'll see. i do think that regardless of the surrounding circumstances, you tend to see alot in head-to-head matchups. it's guys on the court making plays. you can lose and still be making plays to give your team a chance. the player with the weaker team is at a bit of a disadvantage, although, like iverson in '01, he's got the opportunity to go down shooting.

JNice

Well, everyone is gonna hate me for constantly disagreeing, but that is what a discussion board is about..

Anyways, you can't possibly say stats aren't a driving force for hall of fame consideration and votes.

Do you envision Charles Barkley, Patrick Ewing, John Stockton, Karl Malone, Reggie Miller having a tough time getting into the Hall? 0 rings there.

Horace Grant has got a lot of rings, but I don't think he'll be a HOF'er.

Like you said, it is all situational.. Kobe is in a better situation to get himself rings, but that doesn't make him the better player. Just like Horace and Karl Malone. Who is the better PF? Obviously Malone. But Malone has never been in the situation to get himself a ring or two. Grant has. Doesnt make Grant better.

__________________
MC Hammer once said "You can't touch this!" I am THIS.

kflo

but you can't just eliminate performance in winning championships from the discussion. i think that's what's in kobe's favor, not necessarily the rings. all players are judged by what they do in the clutch, and in the biggest moments. the bigger the stage the bigger the moment. rising to that moment, that's some extra credit there. reggie's making the hall not on his stats or his individual awards. isiah's legacy is based more on his moments than his numbers.

Dragnsmke1

1st of all I didnt say stats were not a driving force to get onto the Hall. I know they are. What I am saying is your stats are made because of your situation. But if a person has never seen somebody play( ive never seen anyone from the 70's or before play) all we have to go on is rings and stats. That does not necesarily make one player better than the other but the whole point of the game is to win the big prize in the sky. Every year there are 28 teams that wasted the whole year. Same goes individually. If you dont win it all what were you playing for?

John Stockton and Karl Malone where in postion to get rings there was only one year in thier whole career when the did not make the playoffs. Theyll still be in the Hall but it will be incomplete.

Horace Grant will make the Hall because he was an intricate part of a team that dominated. Hes situation made him one of the best PF in the game at this time.

__________________
All Or Nothing

JNice

No, no, I definitely wasn't eliminating that. But I think stats are much more prominent factor in HOF.

Guys like Horace Grant and Robert Horry have been integral parts in a large number of rings, but will either guy be elected into the hall? It would seem doubtful for both. And Robert Horry has proven to be nearly as clutch as anyone in history.

__________________
MC Hammer once said "You can't touch this!" I am THIS.

Dragnsmke1

Oh yeah... I DO think t-mac is a better player than Kobe for that matter I also believe that Carter, Allen, Mac, and Finley would do a better job if they were in Kobes position but thats why they make video games.

__________________
All Or Nothing

Dragnsmke1

Horry has what 5 rings and you dont think hes going to the Hall?!

__________________
All Or Nothing

JNice

I wouldn't think so, but of course I am not sure. I don't think you will find many guys in the HOF with career avgs of 8 ppg, 5 rpg, 2 apg ...

I could be wrong.

__________________
MC Hammer once said "You can't touch this!" I am THIS.

Dragnsmke1

Then that would probably qualify him as the greatest role player of all time because he started on every squad he won a ring with. He is the common denominator in half of the last decades championships.

__________________
All Or Nothing

kflo

horace grant will not make the hall of fame. ever. horry won't either. they're not close to hof players. stats validate and support greatness, but they don't define it. the stats are part of the picture, the rest is just from watching them play. granted you need both, because if the stats aren't there, there likely wasn't the production to warrant a label of greatness. but there's more once you get past the stats. better stats is better than worse stats, that's pretty obvious. but it doesn't end there. that's part of why these discussions go round and round. there is no definitive measure. thankfully .

Chops

NBA HOF goes like this....

1. Popularity
2. Stats
3. Success


NFL HOF goes like this....

1. Popularity
.
.
.
.
2. The Rest

__________________
"Oohh Maan! He climbed Yi like a squirrel on a tree!" - Stacey King

kflo