eatyourchildren wrote:I don't understand the argument that because Kobe's stats aren't as good (which is not true btw, because only his scoring is down), that CP or LeBron is a better candidate. Stats don't tell the whole story. Kobe's improvement has been in all the non-statistical categories, and has the media, coaches, and opposing teams raving about it.
That's pretty convenient, isn't it? It's like, 'Ah, well, since Kobe's statistics haven't improved all that much, we'll just say all his improvements have been of the non-statistical kind and that should trump any significant improvement by any other player...'
What kind of absolute bollocks is this? If Bryant had increased his assists this season to 7, there would be no end to Laker fans raving about increasing his assists from 5 a season ago to 7 this season. If Bryant was scoring 35 a game, Laker fans wouldn't be able to shut up about how he has no help and he has to score 35 a night for the team to win. If Bryant was shooting 48% from the field, they wouldn't be able to stop gawking at his efficiency.
The issue Laker fans have is that Bryant has not improved his statistics all that much. So what happens? We get the argument that his improvements don't show up in the stat sheet.
I also don't understand the argument that Kobe hasn't made his teammates better, they've gotten better. But CP has made his teammates better? From where do you get that? CP and his teammates were injured last year. How can you assess the impact of CP when you dont have a prior healthy season to compare to?
Paul has made or assisted on just under 50% of his team's baskets this season and accounts for over 50% of the team's total assists. I am not saying stats are the whole story, but that is damn good indicator of what is going on...
I am not sure who you're directing your comments to, but I have never sat here and made the claim Paul makes his teammates better and Kobe Bryant doesn't. What I have said is that I think the Lakers' rise to the top of the West has more to do with individual improvements of players and acquisitions than anything Kobe has done.
That isn't to say Kobe doesn't make the game easier for his teammates by drawing so much attention and hasn't played with a more team-oriented approach this year. But to suggest guys like Derek Fisher, Pau Gasol, Andrew Bynum, and Jordan Farmar have played like they have only because of Bryant is absolutely ridiculous, which is what some people want you to believe.
This load of bollocks people like to spew on these boards about all of Bryant's merits not showing up in the stat sheet is pathetic. If Bryant's stats allowed Laker fans to boast, they would absolutely do it. But since it doesn't fit into their argument, it now has become, 'You can't see the improvement on the stat sheet,' which is somehow supposed to trump the guy who has improved almost every statistical category possible.
It is true that stats don't tell the whole story, but there is a reason they are kept and why so many people look at them.
SA37: How can you possibly argue that CP is a more complete player than Kobe? Kobe can guard the opposing team's best PG/SG/SF. CP cannot do that. Advantage Kobe in the defense department. Do you think CP is going to get 1st Team NBA D? Kobe can manufacture a shot a lot better than CP can. It's not a knock on CP, but Kobe is among the top 3 in manufacturing his own shot. And he's among the top 3 in his position as a defender. How is CP even comparable in terms of completeness?
Why on earth would a 6-foot, 180-pound player be asked to guard SGs and SFs? Are you even listening to what you're suggesting? Anyway, too many times people confuse versatility with being good or being better.
An example would be, who is more versatile, Lamar Odom or Shaq? Now, which guy are you taking on your team, assuming both are in their primes? Who is more versatile, Boris Diaw or Yao Ming? Who are you taking on your team?
Paul may or may not get 1st team all-defense. If I am honest, I would say the chances are fairly good. His main competition would probably be Billups, B. Davis, and Raja Bell. Either way, I don't think it is all that relevant.
Kobe may be better at creating his own shot, but if we broaden it a bit and just say who is best at creating shots for both themselves and their teammates, wouldn't you say Paul probably has an edge?
At the end of the day Paul is a complete point guard. He's efficient (2nd in the L), his asst-to-to ratio is beyond fantastic (3rd in the L), he can score (15th in the L), he can dish it (T-1st), he can steal it (1st), he shoots almost 50% from the floor (36th in the L, 10th amongst guards), 37% from 3 (59th in the L, 39th amongst guards), and 86% from the line (T-16th in the L, 12th amongst guards).
- He is tied with Deron Williams for the most double-doubles by a guard this year (43).
- He is the only guard in the league averaging 20+ppg and 10+apg. (The last guy to do that that I could find is Tim Hardaway in '92-93, when he averaged 21.5ppg and 10.6apg.) As a matter of fact, if he finishes with those numbers, he will be the only active player to have accomplished this. The only guys I could find who had had 20+ppg, 10+apg seasons ever were Hardaway, Magic, Kevin Johnson, Isiah Thomas, Oscar Robertson, and Nate Archibald.