2000-2004: Tracy Mcgrady or Kobe Bryant?

eten · Post #41 » by **eten** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 2:29 pm

Kobe 24 Revis wrote:Let me use the classic RealGM argument for this debate:

Tmac over Kobe because his game was "moar smoothe"

A taste of your own medicine with Kobe's argument "moar skilled" when comparing to other greats.

Btw, I'd take Kobe here too.

230MVP · Post #42 » by **230MVP** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 2:54 pm

00 - Kobe
01 - Kobe
02 - TMac
03 - TMac
04 - Tmac

3 > 2

TMac.

Cmon.. this can be fairly argued either way.

05 - TMac
06-11 - Kobe

EarlTheGoat · Post #43 » by **EarlTheGoat** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 10:37 pm

Afro Mamba is seriously underrated here.

JordansBulls · Post #44 » by **JordansBulls** » Mon Oct 24, 2011 2:32 am

2003 is the only year Tmac has a case.

FANOFNBA · Post #45 » by **FANOFNBA** » Mon Oct 24, 2011 3:08 am

EarlTheGoat wrote:
AlphaWolfAWBA wrote:funny how no one has mentioned "winning championships"

You cant win championships playing with DeClerc, Garrity, Gooden and Mike Miller.

Son.

i guess you cant get past the first round either.......

EarlTheGoat · Post #46 » by **EarlTheGoat** » Mon Oct 24, 2011 3:44 am

FANOFNBA wrote:
EarlTheGoat wrote:
AlphaWolfAWBA wrote:funny how no one has mentioned "winning championships"

You cant win championships playing with DeClerc, Garrity, Gooden and Mike Miller.

Son.

i guess you cant get past the first round either.......

Well if Kobe couldnt make it playing with Lamar Odom, imagine how difficult it is to make it playing with Mike Miller.

8-)

Asianiac_24 · Post #47 » by **Asianiac_24** » Mon Oct 24, 2011 4:58 am

T-Mac had Yao Ming and STILL couldn't get out of the first round.

Precision9 · Post #48 » by **Precision9** » Mon Oct 24, 2011 4:12 pm

Asianiac_24 wrote:T-Mac had Yao Ming and STILL couldn't get out of the first round.

Tmac is just the definition of a loser. He can't win in the 'weak' East and he can't win with the best Center and a top 10 player in the NBA (at the time). The only time his team got past the 1st round was when he wasn't playing.

JordansBulls · Post #49 » by **JordansBulls** » Mon Oct 24, 2011 4:45 pm

AlphaWolfAWBA wrote:Kobe and it aint even close....

funny how no one has mentioned "winning championships"

Can you really use that in this case if the player that won titles didn't win league nor finals mvp those years and went to a franchise that was in 24 finals and won 11 titles prior to him getting there?
Tmac was in a situation that a franchise had only been to 1 finals in there history.

Now if you want to use Houston against him, then you most certainly can.

kasino · Post #50 » by **kasino** » Mon Oct 24, 2011 4:49 pm

i understand HCA but why does previous finals appearances matter if your on a current contender

Original Baller · Post #51 » by **Original Baller** » Mon Oct 24, 2011 4:52 pm

It boggles my mind how this can still be a debatable topic. Are people simply choosing to ignore the last 7 years of evidence which has proven that T-Mac was never on Kobe's level?

At best, back in the day people could argue that T-Mac was only slightly better than Kobe. I don't think the argument was valid that he was much better. I don't understand how the same opinion can be held today when we know that T-Mac intagible wise was never close to Kobe. Sure talent wise he was there but if sports should teach us anything is that talent alone isn't enough. You need the hunger to want to be great and not being afraid to rise to the occasion. Mcgrady is a choke and we all know that now after seeing him fail miserably throughout his career. People can use injuries as an excuse but even when he wasn't injured and he was with Yao, he couldn't get past the first round.

Its an insult to Kobe Bryant's legacy IMO for people to continue to act as if this was ever a valid comparison. T-Mac is no different than Vince Carter or Allen Iverson in terms of former rivals of Kobe that now looking back, we know where never on his level.

JordansBulls · Post #52 » by **JordansBulls** » Mon Oct 24, 2011 4:53 pm

kasino wrote:i understand HCA but why does previous finals appearances matter if your on a current contender

Because it goes to show what type of organization you are playing for. An organization that every decade is contending means said player went to one where it is obvious he will have success especially when playing with arguably the best player in the league.
Now for Tmac's situation to be somewhat similar he would have had to be in San Antonio with Duncan or maybe even in Boston with Pierce. I'm speaking stritcly 2000-2004. 2005 and foward is another story.

Gongxi · Post #53 » by **Gongxi** » Mon Oct 24, 2011 4:56 pm

It means nothing, kasino, ignore it.

kasino · Post #54 » by **kasino** » Mon Oct 24, 2011 5:10 pm

JordansBulls wrote:
kasino wrote:i understand HCA but why does previous finals appearances matter if your on a current contender

Because it goes to show what type of organization you are playing for. An organization that every decade is contending means said player went to one where it is obvious he will have success especially when playing with arguably the best player in the league.
Now for Tmac's situation to be somewhat similar he would have had to be in San Antonio with Duncan or maybe even in Boston with Pierce. I'm speaking stritcly 2000-2004. 2005 and foward is another story.

"said player" is Kobe
ok but for you its a plus for Jordan giving the Bulls its 1st ring.
but I don't think it matters in comparisons because it could be flipped as any losing is scowled upon on a winning franchise and winning is unappreciated.
Jordans 89 and 90 teams were good enough to win espically 90, they have never won to that point but capable.
I'm totally for your HCA stat it something that is fought for all year long

JordansBulls · Post #55 » by **JordansBulls** » Mon Oct 24, 2011 5:57 pm

kasino wrote:
JordansBulls wrote:
kasino wrote:i understand HCA but why does previous finals appearances matter if your on a current contender

Because it goes to show what type of organization you are playing for. An organization that every decade is contending means said player went to one where it is obvious he will have success especially when playing with arguably the best player in the league.
Now for Tmac's situation to be somewhat similar he would have had to be in San Antonio with Duncan or maybe even in Boston with Pierce. I'm speaking stritcly 2000-2004. 2005 and foward is another story.

"said player" is Kobe
ok but for you its a plus for Jordan giving the Bulls its 1st ring.
but I don't think it matters in comparisons because it could be flipped as any losing is scowled upon on a winning franchise and winning is unappreciated.
Jordans 89 and 90 teams were good enough to win espically 90, they have never won to that point but capable.
I'm totally for your HCA stat it something that is fought for all year long

Bulls in 1989 had no business winning it all or even getting out of round 1. They played superior teams in every series. It took an all time great team in Detroit to beat them. Maybe in 1990 we had a better shot but even still Detroit was the defending champion and been to back to back finals by that time and had the HCA.

And like I said, you can't use he has rings from 2000-2004 and Tmac doesn't and so that means Kobe is better based on that. Otherwise you might as well say Pippen was better than Robinson from 1991-1993 because he has rings.

kasino · Post #56 » by **kasino** » Mon Oct 24, 2011 6:06 pm

JordansBulls wrote:
Bulls in 1989 had no business winning it all or even getting out of round 1. They played superior teams in every series. It took an all time great team in Detroit to beat them. Maybe in 1990 we had a better shot but even still Detroit was the defending champion and been to back to back finals by that time and had the HCA.

And like I said, you can't use he has rings from 2000-2004 and Tmac doesn't and so that means Kobe is better based on that. Otherwise you might as well say Pippen was better than Robinson from 1991-1993 because he has rings.

why would it take an all-time great Deriot team to take out a team having no business out the 1st round?
they just lost in the ECF, could have gone either way and yes a better chance in 90

never used rings for the arguement just asked why franchise history matters if playing on a current contender.

Ginobili · Post #57 » by **Ginobili** » Mon Mar 11, 2013 1:16 am

Bump.

jman2585 · Post #58 » by **jman2585** » Mon Mar 11, 2013 1:46 am

Well, for peak I'd take T-Mac in this period. Not sure what factors people want to use to "balance out" the rest.

GAME TIME · Post #59 » by **GAME TIME** » Mon Mar 11, 2013 1:50 am

AlphaWolfAWBA wrote:Kobe and it aint even close....

funny how no one has mentioned "winning championships"

Kobe was the better allaround player (defense is the most important part of basketball) and won 3 titles in that stretch...

Kelly Tripuka could score 30ppg 6reb 6ast in the 2003 Orlando Magic and Lose in the first round...or miss the playoff's...

Oh yeah I forgot...Winning is just pure Luck and special teamates that No one else has

Welll said.

Tmac did a lot of stat padding, great stats, but his teams were atrocious

RayBan-Sematra · Post #60 » by **RayBan-Sematra** » Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:19 am

Hmm.

#1. Let me say that using the "Ring" argument to say Kobe was better is stupid.
Those early 00 Laker teams were built around Shaq.
He was the best player in the league and the primary reason for their success.

Kobe was Shaq's supporting star (and or Pippen) and honestly didn't even perform that well in the 00 or 02 playoffs.

00 Kobe : 21 / 4.4apg on 52%TS -- (19.3 PER)
02 Kobe : 26 / 4.5apg on 51%TS -- (20.5 PER)

So any Kobe fans who want to say that Bryant was better then T-Mac for that reason should also agree that Wade > Kobe in 2012.

Shaq with T-Mac in the early 00's definitely would have won multiple Rings and they wouldn't have lost to the Spurs in 2003.

Let's look at who the best player was year by year.

00 : Kobe
01 : Kobe
02 : T-Mac
03 : T-Mac (not even close this year)
04 : Kobe

(05 : T-Mac)

Pretty close.
I'd say it's a slight edge for Kobe if you just look at 00-04 but if you include 05 T-Mac has the edge.

Kobe obviously went on to have a MUCH (not even close) better career but from 00-05 they were neck & neck with eachother.