RealGM

Cavsfansince84 wrote:I suspect that Kobe will win this poll going away but I think they are a similar tier of player. Kobe winning a fmvp on his resume is too much for Luka to overcome though in terms of perception.

They aren’t Kobe is a lot better at almost every part of basketball than Luka they aren’t close to comparable and they never will be

ceoofkobefans wrote:

Cavsfansince84 wrote:I suspect that Kobe will win this poll going away but I think they are a similar tier of player. Kobe winning a fmvp on his resume is too much for Luka to overcome though in terms of perception.

They aren’t Kobe is a lot better at almost every part of basketball than Luka they aren’t close to comparable and they never will be

Well Luka is still only 24. It's hard to argue anything to do with Kobe with Kobe die hard fans though because they tend to rate him way higher than 99% of other bb fans do.

Always confuses me when people take one aspect of a comparison they know "their guy" wins and just no further. This would be like saying I'd take Paul George over Kobe because both are very good offensive players but PG13 is a much better defender(the gap is bigger between he and Kobe than Kobe and Luka).

We'd all (hopefully) laugh at that, but multiple posters have suggested this is Kobe just because he's the better defender except his defensive impact during his best offensive years isn't even a positive so why would it remotely be a deciding factor?

This is likely a case of people using young Kobe's (protected by peak Shaq) defense and pretending it happened at the same time he was putting up massive numbers on bad teams and thinking this is actualized Kobe. He was never that guy.

Now is his actual best year better than anything we've seen from Luka yet? I'd say yes, though its a lot closer than you think because you can make the case Luka is already a better offensive player than Kobe ever was.

But peaks aren't combining his best defensive year with his most prolific offensive seasons. That's not a thing. And also just being better at defense doesn't mean their offense is a wash so he wins out. You have to make the actual case why his offense is competitive. (to be clear I am not saying it is not, I'm just saying you should lay that out).

ceoofkobefans wrote:

Cavsfansince84 wrote:I suspect that Kobe will win this poll going away but I think they are a similar tier of player. Kobe winning a fmvp on his resume is too much for Luka to overcome though in terms of perception.

They aren’t Kobe is a lot better at almost every part of basketball than Luka they aren’t close to comparable and they never will be

Luka is better peak to peak, and in 6-9 years he will be voted ahead of him in the top 100 project because objective people will see that.

ceoofkobefans wrote:

Cavsfansince84 wrote:I suspect that Kobe will win this poll going away but I think they are a similar tier of player. Kobe winning a fmvp on his resume is too much for Luka to overcome though in terms of perception.

They aren’t Kobe is a lot better at almost every part of basketball than Luka they aren’t close to comparable and they never will be

That's not true, Luka is already a better passer and playmaker for example.

70sFan wrote:

ceoofkobefans wrote:

Cavsfansince84 wrote:I suspect that Kobe will win this poll going away but I think they are a similar tier of player. Kobe winning a fmvp on his resume is too much for Luka to overcome though in terms of perception.

They aren’t Kobe is a lot better at almost every part of basketball than Luka they aren’t close to comparable and they never will be

That's not true, Luka is already a better passer and playmaker for example.

Rebounder too.

I think ultimately people just like who they like in most of these conversations. It takes a fair amount of effort to change that sort of emotionally-charged opinion, and most people aren't really looking to do that in sport fandom. Granted, it's a bit different here on the PC Board when the conversation is flowing and the ad hominems are not, heh, but even here it can be challenging. I find it challenging watching the guys I grew up with have their place at the table eroding away beneath them, being past by other players, etc sometimes. It is what it is, though, the inexorable roll of time.

Kobe is a very popular player even now. He occupies a space that isn't about fact so much as emotion. Defiance, independence, doing things his way... he has a sort of inimitable character to his persona, in death as in life. We can talk about rTS and his shot selection and how many of his All-D teams he actually deserved (kind of like MJ on that front). We can talk about his postseason performances in the WCFs versus in the Finals. We can talk about 2006, we can talk about longevity, about starting as a teenager and coming up under Shaq and all of that stuff and in the end, people will generally hold onto their initial opinion. Especially if they were teens when he was playing, but far from exclusively.

Luka has been afforded the opportunity to be helio earlier than Kobe, so he's doing stuff Kobe never really had a chance to do until he had big mileage on his body. He's like 3 years younger than Kobe was before Shaq got traded and already going into his sixth season. He plays a different style of ball that Kobe in that he works the playmaking angle a lot more. He's less healthy and isn't as good a defender, but his offensive impact looks like absolute apex Kobe is more like Luka's average. Because he's a mediocre FT shooter and shoots his 3s in bulk at below league-average percentages, Luka doesn't gain as much separation from league average efficiency as does Kobe. So he scores a lot, but he leaves a lot of points on the table and can go on dry spells when he's launching that Harden-esque volume from downtown and bricking freebies.

Kobe was a +1.9% rTS guy on his career, but more like a +3% guy from 2000-2009 and had 5 seasons in that stretch of +3.4% or better. Particularly when you look at his volume and the era in which he played half of that stretch (and yes, he had two of those seasons pre-2005), he comes across looking as a better scorer from that lens. He had 6 seasons of 100+ TSAdd in that stretch, topping out a little over 160. Luka's next season of 100+ TSAdd will be his first. Again, he's younger, so he's getting the chance to gun on middling teams (2022 WCF notwithstanding, of course) and sort through all of that, so it will be interesting to see where his career arc goes.

All that blabble aside, I think that the premise of the thread is a bit off. I don't think we have seen peak Luka yet. I think that's more a mid/late 20s type of situation that he's moving toward, rather than having already arrived. At the moment, I would tend to take Luka anyway because I think his offensive value is consistently better, but I think it'll become clearer as he hits his actual prime and peak.

One_and_Done wrote:Where is the bad team Kobe dragged to the WCFs? I don't see his case.

Jalen Brunson was responsible for the success of that Maverick's team in much the same way he was responsible for the success of the Knicks. The Mavs didn't make the playoffs without Brunson...

SelfishPlayer wrote:

One_and_Done wrote:Where is the bad team Kobe dragged to the WCFs? I don't see his case.

Jalen Brunson was responsible for the success of that Maverick's team in much the same way he was responsible for the success of the Knicks. The Mavs didn't make the playoffs without Brunson...

I think it's fairly clear that isn't true. Luka waa the focal point of everything on the Mavs team, and has a healthy stat lead on Brunson in almost evert category except turnovers. The Mavs also won the equivalent of 47-48 wins the previous 2 seasons when Brunson was a bench player.

One_and_Done wrote:

SelfishPlayer wrote:

One_and_Done wrote:Where is the bad team Kobe dragged to the WCFs? I don't see his case.

Jalen Brunson was responsible for the success of that Maverick's team in much the same way he was responsible for the success of the Knicks. The Mavs didn't make the playoffs without Brunson...

I think it's fairly clear that isn't true. Luka waa the focal point of everything on the Mavs team, and has a healthy stat lead on Brunson in almost evert category except turnovers. The Mavs also won the equivalent of 47-48 wins the previous 2 seasons when Brunson was a bench player.

Stats don't get you to the playoffs, wins do. Luka can't accumulate enough wins without Brunson. Brunson certainly has won playoff games for the Mavs without Luka and took his own team to the playoffs in NYC. Luka has Kyrie Irving and still can't lead the Mavs to the playoffs, how much more help does he need? He has an All NBA player with an NBA championship he's teamed with and still can't get the job done.

Some of you people are really **** annoying, Jesus Christ.

If I had to pick one playoff run, I'd say 2001 Kobe is by a good margin the best between the two, but counting full season I'm actually not sure. I'll probably lean into 2008 and 2009 Kobe more.

ceoofkobefans wrote:

Cavsfansince84 wrote:I suspect that Kobe will win this poll going away but I think they are a similar tier of player. Kobe winning a fmvp on his resume is too much for Luka to overcome though in terms of perception.

They aren’t Kobe is a lot better at almost every part of basketball than Luka they aren’t close to comparable and [b]they never will be[/b]

Still picking Kobe for now, but I imagine Luka will surpass him soon.

SelfishPlayer wrote:
Stats don't get you to the playoffs, wins do. Luka can't accumulate enough wins without Brunson. Brunson certainly has won playoff games for the Mavs without Luka and took his own team to the playoffs in NYC. Luka has Kyrie Irving and still can't lead the Mavs to the playoffs, how much more help does he need? He has an All NBA player with an NBA championship he's teamed with and still can't get the job done.

The Mavs lost him for nothing, so it was always going to be a major impact swing. Brunson is a good player and they didn't replace what they lost. It was inevitable that they'd be worse. The offense was actually +4 over the year before, like noticeably better, but their D just couldn't handle it. So it's a touch more complex than "Luka can't accumulate enough wins without Brunson."

There is a baseline level of talent players need to win games. In 05, Lebron had a similar level of offensive impact and won 42 games. The year after, they switched to Mike Brown, Lebron had improved some and they made it to 50 wins and didn't have to deal with Jeff McInnis as a starter anymore. They added Damon Jones and Donyell Marshall, the spacing got better, etc. They went from 27th in 3PAr and 3P% to 9th in 3PAr and 24th in 3P%. Changes, right?

The Mavs didn't just lose Brunson. They became the worst offensive rebounding team in the league, fell off a cliff defensively, got way worse at forcing turnovers and defending shots and went from 10th to 27th at fouling the other team. That's not all on Luka. Brunson was way better about fouling guys than Kyrie, for example.

Context matters. Luka's running into what every high-volume focal star does: you need people around you contributing all over the place to win. Even Jordan ran into this in the mid-80s.

tsherkin wrote:

SelfishPlayer wrote:
Stats don't get you to the playoffs, wins do. Luka can't accumulate enough wins without Brunson. Brunson certainly has won playoff games for the Mavs without Luka and took his own team to the playoffs in NYC. Luka has Kyrie Irving and still can't lead the Mavs to the playoffs, how much more help does he need? He has an All NBA player with an NBA championship he's teamed with and still can't get the job done.

The Mavs lost him for nothing, so it was always going to be a major impact swing. Brunson is a good player and they didn't replace what they lost. It was inevitable that they'd be worse. The offense was actually +4 over the year before, like noticeably better, but their D just couldn't handle it. So it's a touch more complex than "Luka can't accumulate enough wins without Brunson."

There is a baseline level of talent players need to win games. In 05, Lebron had a similar level of offensive impact and won 42 games. The year after, they switched to Mike Brown, Lebron had improved some and they made it to 50 wins and didn't have to deal with Jeff McInnis as a starter anymore. They added Damon Jones and Donyell Marshall, the spacing got better, etc. They went from 27th in 3PAr and 3P% to 9th in 3PAr and 24th in 3P%. Changes, right?

The Mavs didn't just lose Brunson. They became the worst offensive rebounding team in the league, fell off a cliff defensively, got way worse at forcing turnovers and defending shots and went from 10th to 27th at fouling the other team. That's not all on Luka. Brunson was way better about fouling guys than Kyrie, for example.

Context matters. Luka's running into what every high-volume focal star does: you need people around you contributing all over the place to win. Even Jordan ran into this in the mid-80s.

Luka was credited with "dragging" the Mavs to the conference Finals the year prior even though he missed a few playoff games that Brunson starred in his absence. I will make sure that Luka gets dragged for MISSING the playoffs with the Mavs the very next season after Brunson left and Luka can no longer be solely credited for the success. Luka must now be solely credited for the FAILURE. Brunson dragged the Knicks to the playoffs, why couldn't Luka drag the Mavs to the playoffs?

SelfishPlayer wrote:

tsherkin wrote:

SelfishPlayer wrote:
Stats don't get you to the playoffs, wins do. Luka can't accumulate enough wins without Brunson. Brunson certainly has won playoff games for the Mavs without Luka and took his own team to the playoffs in NYC. Luka has Kyrie Irving and still can't lead the Mavs to the playoffs, how much more help does he need? He has an All NBA player with an NBA championship he's teamed with and still can't get the job done.

The Mavs lost him for nothing, so it was always going to be a major impact swing. Brunson is a good player and they didn't replace what they lost. It was inevitable that they'd be worse. The offense was actually +4 over the year before, like noticeably better, but their D just couldn't handle it. So it's a touch more complex than "Luka can't accumulate enough wins without Brunson."

There is a baseline level of talent players need to win games. In 05, Lebron had a similar level of offensive impact and won 42 games. The year after, they switched to Mike Brown, Lebron had improved some and they made it to 50 wins and didn't have to deal with Jeff McInnis as a starter anymore. They added Damon Jones and Donyell Marshall, the spacing got better, etc. They went from 27th in 3PAr and 3P% to 9th in 3PAr and 24th in 3P%. Changes, right?

The Mavs didn't just lose Brunson. They became the worst offensive rebounding team in the league, fell off a cliff defensively, got way worse at forcing turnovers and defending shots and went from 10th to 27th at fouling the other team. That's not all on Luka. Brunson was way better about fouling guys than Kyrie, for example.

Context matters. Luka's running into what every high-volume focal star does: you need people around you contributing all over the place to win. Even Jordan ran into this in the mid-80s.

Luka was credited with "dragging" the Mavs to the conference Finals the year prior even though he missed a few playoff games that Brunson starred in his absence. I will make sure that Luka gets dragged for MISSING the playoffs with the Mavs the very next season after Brunson left and Luka can no longer be solely credited for the success. Luka must now be solely credited for the FAILURE. Brunson dragged the Knicks to the playoffs, why couldn't Luka drag the Mavs to the playoffs?

It's simple. The Mavs didn't only lose Brunson, that's just part of the problem.

Look at what changed and try to understand why they're one of the worse (if not the worst) defensive team in the league. It's very concerning at this point, and even with small moves they could become much better.

Queta got out of Sacramento and even with all the injuries he was the kind of C they needed, and even if he has injury problems he was definitely a good gamble for a minimum. Mavs just gotta sort it out in what they need, and it isn't star power.

Joao Saraiva wrote:

SelfishPlayer wrote:

tsherkin wrote:
The Mavs lost him for nothing, so it was always going to be a major impact swing. Brunson is a good player and they didn't replace what they lost. It was inevitable that they'd be worse. The offense was actually +4 over the year before, like noticeably better, but their D just couldn't handle it. So it's a touch more complex than "Luka can't accumulate enough wins without Brunson."

There is a baseline level of talent players need to win games. In 05, Lebron had a similar level of offensive impact and won 42 games. The year after, they switched to Mike Brown, Lebron had improved some and they made it to 50 wins and didn't have to deal with Jeff McInnis as a starter anymore. They added Damon Jones and Donyell Marshall, the spacing got better, etc. They went from 27th in 3PAr and 3P% to 9th in 3PAr and 24th in 3P%. Changes, right?

The Mavs didn't just lose Brunson. They became the worst offensive rebounding team in the league, fell off a cliff defensively, got way worse at forcing turnovers and defending shots and went from 10th to 27th at fouling the other team. That's not all on Luka. Brunson was way better about fouling guys than Kyrie, for example.

Context matters. Luka's running into what every high-volume focal star does: you need people around you contributing all over the place to win. Even Jordan ran into this in the mid-80s.

Luka was credited with "dragging" the Mavs to the conference Finals the year prior even though he missed a few playoff games that Brunson starred in his absence. I will make sure that Luka gets dragged for MISSING the playoffs with the Mavs the very next season after Brunson left and Luka can no longer be solely credited for the success. Luka must now be solely credited for the FAILURE. Brunson dragged the Knicks to the playoffs, why couldn't Luka drag the Mavs to the playoffs?

It's simple. The Mavs didn't only lose Brunson, that's just part of the problem.

Look at what changed and try to understand why they're one of the worse (if not the worst) defensive team in the league. It's very concerning at this point, and even with small moves they could become much better.

Queta got out of Sacramento and even with all the injuries he was the kind of C they needed, and even if he has injury problems he was definitely a good gamble for a minimum. Mavs just gotta sort it out in what they need, and it isn't star power.

That's so true because in the history of the NBA two players as great as Luka and Kyrie are enough to win a championship. IMO the Mavs need Luka to play without the ball more and not replace those touches with Kyrie. They could use a "third guy" who is a playmaker and defender similar to Draymond and Iguodala or great defenders that don't need touches like Tayshaun and Merion while being able to make shots.

SelfishPlayer wrote:Luka was credited with "dragging" the Mavs to the conference Finals the year prior even though he missed a few playoff games that Brunson starred in his absence. I will make sure that Luka gets dragged for MISSING the playoffs with the Mavs the very next season after Brunson left and Luka can no longer be solely credited for the success. Luka must now be solely credited for the FAILURE. Brunson dragged the Knicks to the playoffs, why couldn't Luka drag the Mavs to the playoffs?

Again, though, this escapes the basic idea that one guy can only ever do so much without production from his teammates. He played phenomenal basketball last year and this year. His offense was even better this year, as it happens, but it mattered only so much. Dragging him over this season is somewhat foolish; who else was going to make them look better? Even Jordan had sub-.500 and .500 seasons when his teammates weren't good enough, so if that's the standard, then dragging Luka (who isn't in the GOAT conversation) just comes off as non-sensical.

tsherkin wrote:

SelfishPlayer wrote:Luka was credited with "dragging" the Mavs to the conference Finals the year prior even though he missed a few playoff games that Brunson starred in his absence. I will make sure that Luka gets dragged for MISSING the playoffs with the Mavs the very next season after Brunson left and Luka can no longer be solely credited for the success. Luka must now be solely credited for the FAILURE. Brunson dragged the Knicks to the playoffs, why couldn't Luka drag the Mavs to the playoffs?

Again, though, this escapes the basic idea that one guy can only ever do so much without production from his teammates. He played phenomenal basketball last year and this year. His offense was even better this year, as it happens, but it mattered only so much. Dragging him over this season is somewhat foolish; who else was going to make them look better? Even Jordan had sub-.500 and .500 seasons when his teammates weren't good enough, so if that's the standard, then dragging Luka (who isn't in the GOAT conversation) just comes off as non-sensical.

It's not only that Luka missed the playoffs, it happened the season after he was credited for dragging a team to the Conference Finals. There was regression instead of progression. Luka's fans don't have any expectations for his team succes. If he dragged a team to the Conference Finals then he should be expected to do the same thing or better the following season. Imagine if the Sixers didn't make it out of the first round of the playoffs or missed the playoffs altogether. The city would be in an uproar! Luka is held unaccountable for the Mavs not making the postseason but people credited him for being the sole force behind getting it done the previous season.

The mavs defense is not Lukas fault lol

I’m taking kobe here, caveat that’s I have peak Kobe higher than anyone on the board does, but from a skillset standpoint Lukas already hiiiigh up the totem pole

Whether it’ll be a situation or something else I do think luka will have an amazing goat type year one of these seasons but I feel he’s already at the level where he can do that