RealGM

Better player?

Kobe.

Despite the similar supporting casts (I think Wade's was better tbh), Kobe led a much better team. The '06 Lakers actually get slept on quite a bit. They were a 2.53 SRS team, which was 7th in the league, and had the 8th best offense. For reference, the 7th best team in the league by SRS this year was the Bucks. Kobe matched those results with Smush Parker, Luke Walton and Kwame Brown as 3/5 starters, who were all well below average starters at those positions.

Meanwhile the '09 Heat, despite Wade's nicer boxscore numbers, were a 0.49 SRS team, 14th in the league (that was the Hawks this year) and 20th on offense. This is despite at least somewhat serviceable starters like Marion, Haslem and Chalmers (laugh if you want but Chalmers was good enough to start for a back to back champion a few years later...)

Even if you don't think Wade's cast was necessarily better, they were at least comparable, and Kobe's team results blew Wade's out of the water.

If you care about impact there is no argument for Wade.

ardee wrote:Kobe.

Despite the similar supporting casts (I think Wade's was better tbh), Kobe led a much better team. The '06 Lakers actually get slept on quite a bit. They were a 2.53 SRS team, which was 7th in the league, and had the 8th best offense. For reference, the 7th best team in the league by SRS this year was the Bucks. Kobe matched those results with Smush Parker, Luke Walton and Kwame Brown as 3/5 starters, who were all well below average starters at those positions.

Meanwhile the '09 Heat, despite Wade's nicer boxscore numbers, were a 0.49 SRS team, 14th in the league (that was the Hawks this year) and 20th on offense. This is despite at least somewhat serviceable starters like Marion, Haslem and Chalmers (laugh if you want but Chalmers was good enough to start for a back to back champion a few years later...)

Even if you don't think Wade's cast was necessarily better, they were at least comparable, and Kobe's team results blew Wade's out of the water.

If you care about impact there is no argument for Wade.

Giannis, Jrue, Khris each missed 16 or more games this Rs this and most importantly Brook only PLAYED 13 games this regular season. Bucks were at a 65 win pace with just their big 3 and they were an average defense this season since Brook was out and became dominant again with him in playoffs.

I also don't know why you're ignoring Lamar Odom. He was really **** good. And him and Kobe only missed 4 games combined which is why their record was as good as it was despite a trash heap behind them.

GSP wrote:

ardee wrote:Kobe.

Despite the similar supporting casts (I think Wade's was better tbh), Kobe led a much better team. The '06 Lakers actually get slept on quite a bit. They were a 2.53 SRS team, which was 7th in the league, and had the 8th best offense. For reference, the 7th best team in the league by SRS this year was the Bucks. Kobe matched those results with Smush Parker, Luke Walton and Kwame Brown as 3/5 starters, who were all well below average starters at those positions.

Meanwhile the '09 Heat, despite Wade's nicer boxscore numbers, were a 0.49 SRS team, 14th in the league (that was the Hawks this year) and 20th on offense. This is despite at least somewhat serviceable starters like Marion, Haslem and Chalmers (laugh if you want but Chalmers was good enough to start for a back to back champion a few years later...)

Even if you don't think Wade's cast was necessarily better, they were at least comparable, and Kobe's team results blew Wade's out of the water.

If you care about impact there is no argument for Wade.

Giannis, Jrue, Khris each missed 16 or more games this Rs this and most importantly Brook only PLAYED 13 games this regular season. Bucks were at a 65 win pace with just their big 3 and they were an average defense this season since Brook was out and became dominant again with him in playoffs.

I also don't know why you're ignoring Lamar Odom. He was really **** good. And him and Kobe only missed 4 games combined which is why their record was as good as it was despite a trash heap behind them.

Odom was good, yes, but he wasn't great. He's not suited to be a second option, and that is well known... His presence doesn't make up for the fact that the other 3 starters were below average and negatives in a lot of situations.

Also, I wasn't using the Bucks as a comparison point to the '06 Lakers to deride them, but rather to show how impressive the Lakers were.

Wade since he actually gave consistent effort on defense.

Wade, because his defense was just at another level.

I think Wade's offensive and defensive peaks basically overlapped, while Kobe's defensive peak was prior to becoming an offensive superstar in 01. It shows in the impact numbers I think.

2009 Wade

PIPM-6.27
RAPTOR-9.39
Backpicks BPM-6.5
Google Sites RAPM-6.4
ESPN RPM-6.81

2006 Kobe

PIPM-3.88
RAPTOR-6.06
Backpicks BPM-5.1
Google Sites RAPM-4.8
ESPN RPM-5.42

Wade was a much better two way player.


Ardee, you're talking about the Heat's offense not being as good. You know who Michael Beasley is, right? He was their 2nd lead scorer...as a rookie.


Wade did not have a better roster at all. If he had a better roster then his team would have done better. It's not like Wade is not an MVP caliber player.

Kobe was the better player. Not sure where this notion he wasn't a great defender came form, he was All-Defense 1st team. Wade was 2nd team All-Defense in 2009.

And like ardee pointed out, Kobe led that subpar cast to 2.53 SRS, while Wade led the subpar Heat cast to 0.49 SRS

Kobe was setting all-time records, and While Wade was great, he wasn't doing what Kobe did in 2006.

Wade was better.

If it wasn't for a historic Lebron season, Wade wins MVP and is the best player in the NBA.

If we look at the +\- Wade and Kobe had a similar offensive rating when both were on the court.Wade had a huge edge on defense too.Big reason why the lakers look better by their number was because Kobe had 200 more minutes that Wade

HeartBreakKid wrote:Wade was a much better two way player.


Ardee, you're talking about the Heat's offense not being as good. You know who Michael Beasley is, right? He was their 2nd lead scorer...as a rookie.


Wade did not have a better roster at all. If he had a better roster then his team would have done better. It's not like Wade is not an MVP caliber player.

Shawn Marion was a year removed from being an All-Star. Haslem and Chalmers were good enough to start on championship teams. These guys aren't world beaters but they're better than the horrific trio that is Parker, George and Brown (yeah, I had to double check, it wasn't Walton starting at the 3 that particular year, he did in 2007 though). Some games Odom played the 3 and they went with Mihm and Brown in the frontcourt

Modern scorers like Harden and LeBron typically play a setup with a lead guard, 3 shooters and a big. Meanwhile Kobe was out there with Smush Parker and 3 bigs, and he was STILL having otherworldly impact on offense.

I think Kobe's cast was worse for sure, but even if you don't, you at least have to admit they're comparable. And if you accept that, then Kobe's team results being far superior with comparable casts wins him this comparison.

I'm not denying Wade was MVP level for sure, but his ball dominance and lack of shooting ability led to his having less offensive impact than someone like Kobe. Perhaps Wade indeed was a better defender but Kobe made up the difference on offense so that made him the better player.

Offense was a wash but Wade had a clear advantage defensively.

I got Kobe as being better on offense Wade on defense. Comparable casts but Kobe led his team to more impressive results and was a only a rebound away from making it to the second round so I’ll go Kobe.

Huge DWade fan, but eye-test says Kobe was out of this world that 06 season

Roughly equal, I think that Wade was a bit better overall due to his motor on both ends of the floor, but Kobe played more minutes so it's probably a wash. Both also didn't play up to their standards in postseason.

Same level for me.

Wade had definitely a worse team around him though, just by virtue of Lamar Odom existing. Don't see how that one is arguable.

Jaivl wrote:Same level for me.

Wade had definitely a worse team around him though, just by virtue of Lamar Odom existing. Don't see how that one is arguable.

1 player =/= a team.

As I said above, Kobe played with several negative players. Meanwhile Wade at least had serviceable rotation guys like Marion, Haslem and Chalmers.

ardee wrote:

Jaivl wrote:Same level for me.

Wade had definitely a worse team around him though, just by virtue of Lamar Odom existing. Don't see how that one is arguable.

1 player =/= a team.

As I said above, Kobe played with several negative players. Meanwhile Wade at least had serviceable rotation guys like Marion, Haslem and Chalmers.

It's not the end of the discussion, but Wade's team was comfortably worse without him on the floor than 2006 Lakers without Kobe:

2006 Lakers without Kobe: -8.0 per100
2009 Wade without Wade: -11.0 per100

70sFan wrote:

ardee wrote:

Jaivl wrote:Same level for me.

Wade had definitely a worse team around him though, just by virtue of Lamar Odom existing. Don't see how that one is arguable.

1 player =/= a team.

As I said above, Kobe played with several negative players. Meanwhile Wade at least had serviceable rotation guys like Marion, Haslem and Chalmers.

It's not the end of the discussion, but Wade's team was comfortably worse without him on the floor than 2006 Lakers without Kobe:

2006 Lakers without Kobe: -8.0 per100
2009 Wade without Wade: -11.0 per100

Flawed way to compare casts. The '16 Warriors were -7.8 per 100 without Draymond. Do you think Steph, Klay, Barnes, Iggy and Bogut were basically the same level as Parker, Walton, Cook, Odom and Brown?

ardee wrote:

70sFan wrote:

ardee wrote:
1 player =/= a team.

As I said above, Kobe played with several negative players. Meanwhile Wade at least had serviceable rotation guys like Marion, Haslem and Chalmers.

It's not the end of the discussion, but Wade's team was comfortably worse without him on the floor than 2006 Lakers without Kobe:

2006 Lakers without Kobe: -8.0 per100
2009 Wade without Wade: -11.0 per100

Flawed way to compare casts. The '16 Warriors were -7.8 per 100 without Draymond. Do you think Steph, Klay, Barnes, Iggy and Bogut were basically the same level as Parker, Walton, Cook, Odom and Brown?

Draymond Green had much different role on his team and he played majority of his minutes with other starters. He also played considerably less minutes, which is why different lineups comes into play here.

Wade played 39 mpg in 2009, there wasn't much time left to optimize lineups. Kobe played even more - 41 mpg, which basically means that he played with everyone.

Again, it's not the end of the story but I'd like to hear why you think 2006 Lakers are so much worse.