Is Kobe Bryant's career overstated?

[Sticksboi05]

I am actually surprised by this, I thought Wade's numbers would dominate Kobe's by how you are arguing.

Nah, Kobe was better. I dont care for the winshare and defensive share stats because Wade blocks shots and that naturally favors him, while there isnt data to mark on the ball defending which Kobe was the best at for the 2000s and Wade often struggled with.

Kobe was the better player. Better scorer, defender, and champion.

Naw, my original post simply said I would take a healthy Wade. It never said he was vastly superior. I also told MLS that my purpose was to show that's it's not laughable to take Wade healthy over Kobe. I have a bunch of reasons while all you have is "naw, Kobe's better."

Basically you see the stats and because they all go against your argument, you have nothing to say but "they're wrong, Kobe was better". That's fine but it's foolish to waste time arguing then if you have nothing of substance.

The half a block more a game over those 8 seasons isn't the reason for the defensive win share discrepancy I'll tell you that. This isn't Serge Ibaka. Wade's a far more efficient and wise shooter/scorer.

I'm too lazy to go into the formulas if you don't want to actually say more than a couple sentences back. I went into non-stat arguments such as clutch factor as well and gave Kobe is due as an all-time clutch player.

Also, once again, championships are team accomplishments affected by tons of factors. Barkley never winning a title doesn't put him behind KG, what might is the defensive difference between the two however.

We aren't clinging onto the 2006 Finals, we are using it as proof that Wae was more than capable of lifting a team to a title. That's it. And he did it better than Kobe in any of his five championship runs. Fact.

I think Kobe is top 10. At the bottom of the top 10. You criticize others for hate but you are so set on defending his legacy you ignore tons of evidence with a sentence saying no that's wrong.

[TradeTheBeal!]

You did all the work overrating him already in your first statement. He's definitely not at their level. Not even close to Jordan's level. And if he's close to Bird/Magic's level, it's only because their careers were cut short while Kobe, through the magic of German Cyborg technology, will play until he's 50.

You're a trip, bro.

[AsiaticSkinsFan]

I wouldnt take a healthy Wade over a healthy Kobe either. Its just not

[Sticksboi05]

I wouldnt take a healthy Wade over a healthy Kobe either. Its just not

Well I would and it's not insane to believe so, that's my only point. I think Kobe's longevity is what's the most impressive thing about him. It really is fantastic.

[AsiaticSkinsFan]

Well I would and it's not insane to believe so, that's my only point. I think Kobe's longevity is what's the most impressive thing about him. It really is fantastic.

that and he is the best competitor in the NBA and has been most of his career and one of the best all time.

[Sticksboi05]

that and he is the best competitor in the NBA and has been most of his career and one of the best all time.

Yeah, except when he gives up at the end of elimination games.

Just joking. Sort of. He is a fierce competitor. But you still cannot ignore the plethora of stats I gave in Wade's favor. I never said he was much better, just more efficient.

[Going Commando]

I wouldnt take a healthy Wade over a healthy Kobe either. Its just not

Why not? With a guarantee of health? He's a more efficient scorer, better defender, and a better passer with almost no drop in rebounding despite the fact he's running point most of the time. He's a better all around player.

---------- Post added August-22nd-2012 at 07:41 AM ----------

Naw, my original post simply said I would take a healthy Wade. It never said he was vastly superior. I also told MLS that my purpose was to show that's it's not laughable to take Wade healthy over Kobe. I have a bunch of reasons while all you have is "naw, Kobe's better."

Basically you see the stats and because they all go against your argument, you have nothing to say but "they're wrong, Kobe was better". That's fine but it's foolish to waste time arguing then if you have nothing of substance.

The half a block more a game over those 8 seasons isn't the reason for the defensive win share discrepancy I'll tell you that. This isn't Serge Ibaka. Wade's a far more efficient and wise shooter/scorer.

I'm too lazy to go into the formulas if you don't want to actually say more than a couple sentences back. I went into non-stat arguments such as clutch factor as well and gave Kobe is due as an all-time clutch player.

Also, once again, championships are team accomplishments affected by tons of factors. Barkley never winning a title doesn't put him behind KG, what might is the defensive difference between the two however.

We aren't clinging onto the 2006 Finals, we are using it as proof that Wae was more than capable of lifting a team to a title. That's it. And he did it better than Kobe in any of his five championship runs. Fact.

I think Kobe is top 10. At the bottom of the top 10. You criticize others for hate but you are so set on defending his legacy you ignore tons of evidence with a sentence saying no that's wrong.

I was set to respond to that up until I read your post here. No need to. You took him to the woodshed.

Asiatic doesn't like to argue with tangibles and doesn't think advanced stats that refute his dogmas are useful in basketball. He likes to use straw men and other obnoxious tactics to argue and ultimately just attempts to appeal to his superior understanding of basketball as a reason he's right. But little does he know that most of us know the game an it's history every bit as well as he does, if not better.

Asiatic is also irrational when it comes to any discussion surrounding Kobe. He actually argued against me claiming Kobe was a selfish player in a different thread... I mean that's pretty much paragraph one in the book on Kobe Bean Bryant.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

They lost in the semi-finals.

They lost game 5 on a questionable call. They went on to win game 6, but then lost game 7.

Pippen had a good year (for him) that year, but it wasn't totally out of line for his career. It was the most points he scored/game and he had his highest PER, but they weren't way ahead of other years.

And if you look at win shares that wasn't his best year.

So the point is made that Pippen was a good player but Jordan made him. Yet, the year after the Bulls lost the greatest player of all time, they still win 55 games. Pippen also has arguably the best year of his career and leads the Bulls in virtually every major statistical category, they take the best team in the East, their hated rivals who nearly won the title, to the brink of elimination. I think its safe to say that with more time prepare for the loss of MJ or with a decent 2 guard like Mitch or Clyde, the Bulls could have won a title without MJ. Does that diminish Jordan in any way?

[Sticksboi05]

i dont think Kobe is a top 5 player. I also think he was a much better player than Wade in their primes and is seen and will be seen as that.

Give actual evidence then, not your "he is better" nonsense. Make an actual argument. And saying he scored 60 in a few games isn't going to do it because I could easily point of the dozens in betwen where he crippled his teams out of a possible win insisting on shooting 10-35 for 23 points.

[Going Commando]

Give actual evidence then, not your "he is better" nonsense. Make an actual argument. And saying he scored 60 in a few games isn't going to do it because I could easily point of the dozens in betwen where he crippled his teams out of a possible win insisting on shooting 10-35 for 23 points.

Asiatic is using an appeal to self evidence for nearly all of his arguments for Kobe. That's why he doesn't really give support for his positions. What he doesn't seem to realize is that argument is only sufficient if other people accept its self evidency--which we do not.

So then he will go on the defensive saying stats tell us nothing, PER is a ridiculous stat, WS is geek stuff that has no place in basketball discussions, efficiency is overrated, the only stats that matter are PPG, RPG, & APG, the media and big shoe companies have an agenda, blah blah blah.

What he will not do is get into a nuts and bolts discussion of what the systematic flaw in each of the stats are. He won't accept other appeals to conventional wisdom and self evidency that refute him. He won't accept anecdotal evidence that refutes him. You will eventually get bored arguing with him and move on to other discussions with people interested in intellectual honesty.

If you can't tell, I've argued with him lots of times. Every one ends the same.

[PeterMP]

So the point is made that Pippen was a good player but Jordan made him. Yet, the year after the Bulls lost the greatest player of all time, they still win 55 games. Pippen also has arguably the best year of his career and leads the Bulls in virtually every major statistical category, they take the best team in the East, their hated rivals who nearly won the title, to the brink of elimination. I think its safe to say that with more time prepare for the loss of MJ or with a decent 2 guard like Mitch or Clyde, the Bulls could have won a title without MJ. Does that diminish Jordan in any way?

First, I wouldn't call Mitch or Clyde decent 2 guards. Clyde is in the HOF and if Mitch doesn't end up in the HOF, he'll be considered one of the best players to not make the HOF. They are both AT LEAST very good players.

I also think that comparing the year before Jordan to the year after is a mistake because they added Toni Kuck, who was a good player.

I also think you are missing the importance of Horace Grant.

Yeah they won 55 games w/o Jordan, but the next year, they were 33-32 w/o Jordan (14-3 w/ him where he came back late in the season and played in 17 games).

The difference was Horace Grant.

I think looking closely at the numbers Jordan was probably worth about 10 wins per a season maybe more on a good team. On a less good team (94-95 Bulls), he probably even had more value.

They had a huge jump (about 30 wins) from the year when he played in 17 games to his first full year back, but they were coming off of a -Grant year and added Rodman too. From the year he left to the next year, they lost a few more games despite adding Kukoc.

To look at the value of Pippen, I'd look at the Trailblazers where he was added in w/ pretty minimal changes to a good team and the effect of his addition was essentially negligible.

[Going Commando]

Really? Bosh is really consistent, his a great shooter, defender etc... If his not a top ten big man which is ridiculous, then he shouldn't have a 100 mil dollar contract. Howard has a back injury can't shoot he is powerful, Bynum questionable in my mind always has, and outside that what Gasol? Id rather have Bosh. Bosh is better than you say, please tell me more:)

Im not taking Chandler, aldridge, Noah etc.. etc.. either

Bosh is one of the most important players on the Miami Heat. His a stud

We've been going back and forth for awhile now:) Hey man you have great info we all are going to have our opinions :point2sky

I actually like Bosh and personally think he's one of the ten best bigs in the league. But I don't think that position is very solid and I could see an argument being made for several others over him.

First you've got the pretty obvious ones like Dwight, Dirk, Bynum, Love, and Griffin. Those are probably your five best in the game right now. Then when KG and Duncan are healthy and playing, they're still better too IMO. KG outplayed Bosh in this year's playoffs, and Duncan is the same player he's always been, just getting less minutes to preserve him for the playoffs. Pau is better all around and his brother Marc might be too now. I'd certainly rather have Bosh than Z Bo but I could see someone taking Z Bo if health and mental stability aren't an issue because he's a more skillful offensive player and a much better rebounder. It's close with Noah, but Noah is never healthy. Very different players too. If Amar'e were ever healthy consistently, he'd definitely be better than Bosh. He can shoot like Bosh but he's also a much better rebounder, shot blocker, and inside player.

But the thing is, Bosh is coming off a mostly good run of health the past several years. I'd take him over a few other guys who can actually outplay him for most systems. A big man who doesn't miss many games is worth his weight in gold.

I still wouldn't put him in the top five though.

---------- Post added August-22nd-2012 at 10:36 AM ----------

Also forgot to mention the young guys like DeMarcus Cousins and Greg Monroe. They haven't built a name for themselves yet like Bosh has, but there is every chance they are already better players than him. Those guys are really, really good.

[Sticksboi05]

To look at the value of Pippen, I'd look at the Trailblazers where he was added in w/ pretty minimal changes to a good team and the effect of his addition was essentially negligible.

Yes and let's look at Mario Lemieux in 2005 to determine his worth. Pippen was past his prime when he arrived in Portland. Not fair whatsoever. The point being made was he certainly didn't "disappear" when MJ left in 94. He was 34 when he went to Portland, give me one player who is in their prime at 34...

---------- Post added August-22nd-2012 at 11:18 AM ----------

Really? Bosh is really consistent, his a great shooter, defender etc... If his not a top ten big man which is ridiculous, then he shouldn't have a 100 mil dollar contract. Howard has a back injury can't shoot he is powerful, Bynum questionable in my mind always has, and outside that what Gasol? Id rather have Bosh. Bosh is better than you say, please tell me more:)

Im not taking Chandler, aldridge, Noah etc.. etc.. either

Bosh is one of the most important players on the Miami Heat. His a stud

We've been going back and forth for awhile now:) Hey man you have great info we all are going to have our opinions :point2sky

Bosh is a terrible defender and he's not on a $100 mill contract. He is a very good player though offensively.

[Sticksboi05]

its a rubbish stat that gets thrown around by people who probably dont understand the game that clearly.

PER is actually a well-accepted stat by every basketball expert around but okay. Can you use it solely to determine who's better? No. Was I? No.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

First, I wouldn't call Mitch or Clyde decent 2 guards. Clyde is in the HOF and if Mitch doesn't end up in the HOF, he'll be considered one of the best players to not make the HOF. They are both AT LEAST very good players.

I also think that comparing the year before Jordan to the year after is a mistake because they added Toni Kuck, who was a good player.

I also think you are missing the importance of Horace Grant.

Yeah they won 55 games w/o Jordan, but the next year, they were 33-32 w/o Jordan (14-3 w/ him where he came back late in the season and played in 17 games).

The difference was Horace Grant.

I think looking closely at the numbers Jordan was probably worth about 10 wins per a season maybe more on a good team. On a less good team (94-95 Bulls), he probably even had more value.

They had a huge jump (about 30 wins) from the year when he played in 17 games to his first full year back, but they were coming off of a -Grant year and added Rodman too. From the year he left to the next year, they lost a few more games despite adding Kukoc.

To look at the value of Pippen, I'd look at the Trailblazers where he was added in w/ pretty minimal changes to a good team and the effect of his addition was essentially negligible.

Clyde and Mitch were just the first two that game to my head but you are right. I just remember Clyde being at the twilight of his career not in his prime during that time thats all. Pippen with the trailblazers already had a horrible back and was at the end of his career. Thats not a fair comparison, but he still made them better and got them to the game 7 of WCF.

Thats a great point about Horace Grant so thanks for putting that in. Could it be said that the loss of Horace Grant impacted the Bulls more than losing Jordan? There are a lot of ways you can spin this. The point is that Jordan had Pippen, Grant, Rodman established 3point shooters as well as Kukoc and Harper who wasn't nearly as good after the knee problems but at one point was a 20ppg player. He had a lot of talent around him as well.

I don't understand why Kobe is the only one who is discredited for playing with other great players. Kobe won without Shaq, Jordan never won without Pippen, Magic never won without Kareem, Bird never won without McHale, Parish.

Magic played with Kareem and Worthy and even lost Finals MVPs to them as well as other great teammates and coach. As did Bird as does everyone.

You can't disparage Kobe because he played with one other HOF, who happened to be the most dominant player in NBA history, during the beginning of his career. Kobe was a Laker before Shaq was if i'm not mistaken. And the structure of the league now is a superteam...its next to impossible to win if you don't have one. Kobe wants to win and the Lakers always have a contender so they added a couple great pieces to the team. Now the excuses are already in place if he gets a couple more before he is done.

[PeterMP]

Yes and let's look at Mario Lemieux in 2005 to determine his worth. Pippen was past his prime when he arrived in Portland. Not fair whatsoever. The point being made was he certainly didn't "disappear" when MJ left in 94. He was 34 when he went to Portland, give me one player who is in their prime at 34.

I'll admit that his value might have been more in his prime than at 34.

The Bulls added a 32 year old Jordan for a full season and a 34 year old Rodman and improved by 30 games.

I think that looking at addition/subtraction of a single player tells you more about that player than subtracting another player does.

---------- Post added August-22nd-2012 at 11:46 AM ----------

Clyde and Mitch were just the first two that game to my head but you are right. I just remember Clyde being at the twilight of his career not in his prime during that time thats all. Pippen with the trailblazers already had a horrible back and was at the end of his career. Thats not a fair comparison, but he still made them better and got them to the game 7 of WCF.

Thats a great point about Horace Grant so thanks for putting that in. Could it be said that the loss of Horace Grant impacted the Bulls more than losing Jordan? There are a lot of ways you can spin this. The point is that Jordan had Pippen, Grant, Rodman established 3point shooters as well as Kukoc and Harper who wasn't nearly as good after the knee problems but at one point was a 20ppg player. He had a lot of talent around him as well.

I don't understand why Kobe is the only one who is discredited for playing with other great players. Kobe won without Shaq, Jordan never won without Pippen, Magic never won without Kareem, Bird never won without McHale, Parish.

Magic played with Kareem and Worthy and even lost Finals MVPs to them as well as other great teammates and coach. As did Bird as does everyone.

You can't disparage Kobe because he played with one other HOF, who happened to be the most dominant player in NBA history, during the beginning of his career. Kobe was a Laker before Shaq was if i'm not mistaken. And the structure of the league now is a superteam...its next to impossible to win if you don't have one. Kobe wants to win and the Lakers always have a contender so they added a couple great pieces to the team. Now the excuses are already in place if he gets a couple more before he is done.

1. Given the way that basketball is played today (realistically post-1980s basketball), I generally think interior defense is extremely under rated by most people and most stats and Grant was a good interior defender and a good complementary scorer. It wouldn't surprise me if most people under estimated his value to those teams. I don't think Grant had more value than Jordan. Adding Jordan back to a Grantless Bulls made them very good again (even thought it was for so few games), and they had their best seson w/o Grant.

2. The TrailBlazers made the conference finals the year before (and were swept, but realistically that difference is pretty negligible).

3. I haven't bashed Kobe in this thread. But if I did, I wouldn't use championships (and realistically I don't think most people would. The only time they come up is when his supporters use them to support him (and honestly my response wouldn't be anything about his teammates, but I'd ask them where they ranked Robert Horry and Stever Kerr on their list of greates players)) . If I was going to bash, I'd point out what as been stated above. He's an awfully ineffecient scorer.

[Sticksboi05]

I'll admit that his value might have been more in his prime than at 34.

The Bulls added a 32 year old Jordan for a full season and a 34 year old Rodman and improved by 30 games.

I think that looking at addition/subtraction of a single player tells you more about that player than subtracting another player does.

You're overanalyzing the original argument which was simply that he didn't disappear in 94. That's truth also. What his overall worth was, I mean we can check win shares and other stuff. And yes, it's easier to see how good you are when you are added and not when a teammate is subtracted.

[AsiaticSkinsFan]

Give actual evidence then, not your "he is better" nonsense. Make an actual argument. And saying he scored 60 in a few games isn't going to do it because I could easily point of the dozens in betwen where he crippled his teams out of a possible win insisting on shooting 10-35 for 23 points.

i mean Kobe has busted Wade's ass more often than not when the two have played each other

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=bryanko01&p2=wadedw01

I see Kobe as the better scorer and defender. The only thing Wade has clearly over Kobe is finishing around the basket and playing the passing lanes, but Kobe is a superior player.

[Shabby]

Didn't you vote Kobe as the greatest player of all-time?

:ols:

[Sticksboi05]

i mean Kobe has busted Wade's ass more often than not when the two have played each other

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=bryanko01&p2=wadedw01

I see Kobe as the better scorer and defender. The only thing Wade has clearly over Kobe is finishing around the basket and playing the passing lanes, but Kobe is a superior player.

I have given stats showing Wade scores at a more efficient clip and if he played as many minutes a night (or chucked as many shots) as Kobe had age 23-30 as the comparison was made, their total ppg's would be about the same. As it stands he was a bucket a game behind shooting 2-3% more efficiently which over an 8 year span is significant. Wade has a better Defensive Rating and more defensive win shares (which are barely affected by blocks, especially a 0.5 bpg difference). The All-Defensive Teams are a sham. Often based on reputation from years past. Kobe at one point was a very very good defender. Those times have passed. Same with MJ after the first 3-peat.

Wade's obviously a better facilitator as Kobe will go nuts if he doesn't shoot at least 20x a night. The assist percentages agree also. He's a far more efficient player in the playoffs also with more defensive win shares.

What more do you want?

From that list I will concede that in head to head matchups Kobe has performed better. He matches up well size wise with Wade and many of those lopsided efforts took place when Kobe was, indeed, a top defender.

I think Kobe is a more complete scorer but that doesn't make him a more efficient scorer.

[Shabby]

Again Im not hear to knock on Lebron, I just don't what the hype is all about.

Hes breaking all the major "youngest to reach" records, previously held by kobe. 3 time MVP, Kobe has 1, which shows why Kobe has benefitted from having far superior teams. If he is as amazing as all the Kobe/Laker fans think he is, he would have more MVPs. LeBron Won MVP at an earlier age than kobe, won Finals MVP at an earlier age than Kobe. Played for a very poor cavaliers team, took them to the finals in only his 4th season at 22 years old. Career averages of 28/7/7. Being the most hated player in the NBA and overcoming it by winning a championship.

MVP, Finals MVP, All NBA First Team, All NBA Defensive First Team, Great case for being Defensive Player of the Year, NBA Championship, and Olympic Gold Medal. ALL in one year, and is only just now entering his prime, only 27 years of age.

Yeah I dont know what the hype is about either.

[amm0409]

Yeah I dont know what the hype is about either.

Im neither a Fan. NBA just isn't the same. Great stuff about Lebron, but Im not taking him number one. I would have a hard time picking Lebron over Kobe depending on the Team I wanted to build. I don't care what Lebron has done at an earlier age, what his won etc... IV seen them both play.

They both have positives, and again I think Kobe would take the last shot not Lebron just like Wade.

Lebron didn't win the Finals by himself, and Had more talent than MJ, and you could argue the same as Kobe. Your a Lebron fan great, thats awesome. Right now Id pick too many players over him past and present.

Maybe his got the hype but I think its a little overdone. Let the guy win some Championships first and create his dynasty first. His done a lot, but the players and NBA aren't the same (a lot of one on one). This was apart of the troubles with Miami. I still can't believe all the talent on Miami, just like the Lakers.

that 2007 cavaliers team wasn't a poor one they were 50-32 coached by Mike Brown

they had a good defense 4th of 30 as well

If I come off as hating him Iv followed him since high school. His a Beast (I thought he was a stronger Magic Johnson), but I don't think his changed the game like others in NBA history (that can be argued as well because he plays different positions). I think there are other players we could argue as #1 in the league now. Yes, Lebron is physically out of this world, I'm still taking Durant over him. Lebron has done more than Durant up to this point, but Durant has been a little underrated in my opinion as well

The 2011 Thunder team was 5th in points

Westbrook had 700 more points than Hughes on that 07 Cavs team but everything else was pretty comparative to.

[Shabby]

that and he is the best competitor in the NBA and has been most of his career and one of the best all time.

Which expains why when thing go bad, he demands for trades until he gets more dominant players. Yeah.....

---------- Post added August-22nd-2012 at 05:04 PM ----------

IV seen them both play.

But LeBron is only 27, and is only gonna get better, so how can you assume he's already at his peak?

I think Kobe would take the last shot not Lebron just like Wade.

[/Quote]

You're right, Kobe would. But I could argue LeBron wouldn't have his team in that position to need a last second shot to win a game as much.

Lebron didn't win the Finals by himself, and Had more talent than MJ, and you could argue the same as Kobe.

Ofcourse he had help, it takes a team to win a championship, but it was clear to everyone minus Laker/Kobe Fans, who the clear cut most dominant player on the court throughout the season (actually last 5 or 6 seasons), playoffs, and finals was.

that 2007 cavaliers team wasn't a poor one they were 50-32 coached by Mike Brown

they had a good defense 4th of 30 as well

They were that good solely because of LeBron. LeBron WAS that team. Mike Brown? Seriously, are you saying Mike Brown is a great coach?

[amm0409]

\

They were that good solely because of LeBron. LeBron WAS that team. Mike Brown? Seriously, are you saying Mike Brown is a great coach?

Haha no just pointing out who the coach was.

Hughes had 1045 points

Ilgauskas had 925

Gooden had 885

Yes Lebron was that team, but he had some playmakers as well. yes he was the leader of that team

---------- Post added August-22nd-2012 at 05:12 PM ----------

But LeBron is only 27, and is only gonna get better, so how can you assume he's already at his peak?

Oh, Lebron could continue his dynasty. I don't know if his peaked. I think his playing at a great level right now, I think the Olympics showed that.

---------- Post added August-22nd-2012 at 05:17 PM ----------

Ofcourse he had help, it takes a team to win a championship, but it was clear to everyone minus Laker/Kobe Fans, who the clear cut most dominant player on the court throughout the season (actually last 5 or 6 seasons), playoffs, and finals was.

Id take the Miami Heat team over the 08 and 09 Lakers team. Players wise as a whole. Some have already talked about Gasol being better than Bosh, but I think Id take Bosh over Gasol. Bosh's Range and shot are underrated I think his Mr. Consistent then add Wade which is another Kobe. Would be an interesting battle?

Thats why I head scratch with all the talent Kobe and Lebron have on their teams. It gets blurry because of all that talent

[Going Commando]

Ammo, I would take Kobe's Lakers teams over LeBron's current Heat team. That's a three man team through and through. The lack of talent in the rest of the roster really became apparent when Bosh missed most of the playoffs this year and the Miami had to seriously scrape for wins. They only made it out of the Eastern Conference because LeBron made a gigantic leap and became utterly unstoppable.

LeBron has Wade, without whom I don't think he could win a championship. Wade is great. Bosh is really good. But man, the rest of that team really blows. Battier, Miller, Juwan Howard, Joel Anthony, Norris Cole, Dexter Pittman, Udonis Haslem... that's a terrible 4-12. Battier playing Center? Yikes. I think the only other guys on that roster after the big 3 that could make a good number of other NBA teams are Haslem, Chalmers, and maybe Battier. None of those guys would be starters or get big minutes on other good teams around the league.

Remember, those Lakers teams had a lot of beef plus an array of really quality role players throughout the entire roster. It wasn't just Kobe, Gasol, Bynum, and Odom. They were well constructed. You generally don't get that close to a threepeat and favored to win it again in the fourth year without being so well made. I think those Lakers teams were better than this Heat team, except that they don't have a player like LeBron.

If you haven't been watching the NBA lately, I recommend it. It's just awesome right now and is making a charge back in a big way. LeBron is definitely the best player in basketball right now and has been for a few years. But this year was different. He made a leap into a monstrously great level of play. He's playing the power point guard position the best the league has ever seen--Bill Simmons called him a rich man's Larry Bird. It's historic and unprecedented. And he's become every bit as good a defender as an offensive player. You might see him win the MVP and the DPOTY in the same season next year, which I can't ever remember a perimeter player doing. Hell, he had a tremendous case for DPOTY this year. He's probably the most valuable defender in the league right now because he's the only one who can defend all five positions at an elite level.

Behind him, the second best player in the league is certainly Kevin Durant. Those two playing the same position, similarly brilliant with talent to become two of the three greatest players of all time, already having met once in the Finals... it's awesome. It's like the rekindling of Magic v. Bird. Those two are making the league great again.

If you were to have a fantasy style draft, I think those two go first and second respectively. The only guy you could make a good case for busting into the order ahead of them is Dwight Howard. But that's only because he's a center and the delta at his position is larger, he's not a better player than them.