2quik4u wrote:

Fly4Fun wrote:

Skyhook79 wrote:

JakeGiant wrote: Tonight on TNT(10:30), we'll see rematch of last year's NBA Finals. Additionally, Kobe Bean is 30 points away from doing something only 14 other NBA Players have done; reach 25,000 in Points. Kobe will be the youngest to achieve this feat.

Thoughts?

Oh yeah, Go Lakers!

The whole "youngest" to reach certain levels in points or whatever is pretty stupid to me, with the age to play in the NBA changing several times over the years. It should be by fewest # of games to reach a certain level of points.

For example:

Wilt took 492 games to reach 20,000 pts
Jordan 617 games
Kareem 683 games
Bird 797 games
Karl Malone 754 games
Iverson 714 games
Kobe 841 games
Lebron currently has played 514 games and is at 14236 pts and will probally need another 210 games to reach 20000 pts giving him 714 games.


The way Kevin Durant is scoring he may end up there pretty high also.

But they represent two different things...

Yes, LeBron will be the youngest, but could have have got to those milestones faster game wise if he did spend 3-4 years in college first like some of the people above? Think how much better his game would have been before entering the NBA.

So it's kind of silly to point at one being better. What's impressive is how LeBron was able to dominate while being so young, it's kind of foolish to just discount that.

Same could be said for Kobe, a lot people forget that Kobe came off the bench his first two years

Fly4Fun wrote:

2quik4u wrote:

Fly4Fun wrote:

Skyhook79 wrote:

JakeGiant wrote: Tonight on TNT(10:30), we'll see rematch of last year's NBA Finals. Additionally, Kobe Bean is 30 points away from doing something only 14 other NBA Players have done; reach 25,000 in Points. Kobe will be the youngest to achieve this feat.

Thoughts?

Oh yeah, Go Lakers!

The whole "youngest" to reach certain levels in points or whatever is pretty stupid to me, with the age to play in the NBA changing several times over the years. It should be by fewest # of games to reach a certain level of points.

For example:

Wilt took 492 games to reach 20,000 pts
Jordan 617 games
Kareem 683 games
Bird 797 games
Karl Malone 754 games
Iverson 714 games
Kobe 841 games
Lebron currently has played 514 games and is at 14236 pts and will probally need another 210 games to reach 20000 pts giving him 714 games.


The way Kevin Durant is scoring he may end up there pretty high also.

But they represent two different things...

Yes, LeBron will be the youngest, but could have have got to those milestones faster game wise if he did spend 3-4 years in college first like some of the people above? Think how much better his game would have been before entering the NBA.

So it's kind of silly to point at one being better. What's impressive is how LeBron was able to dominate while being so young, it's kind of foolish to just discount that.

Same could be said for Kobe, a lot people forget that Kobe came off the bench his first two years

So you're excuse for Kobe is he wasn't good enough (he had to come off the bench his first two years). Hardly seems like a good defense...

2quik4u wrote:

Fly4Fun wrote:

2quik4u wrote:

Fly4Fun wrote:

Skyhook79 wrote:

JakeGiant wrote: Tonight on TNT(10:30), we'll see rematch of last year's NBA Finals. Additionally, Kobe Bean is 30 points away from doing something only 14 other NBA Players have done; reach 25,000 in Points. Kobe will be the youngest to achieve this feat.

Thoughts?

Oh yeah, Go Lakers!

The whole "youngest" to reach certain levels in points or whatever is pretty stupid to me, with the age to play in the NBA changing several times over the years. It should be by fewest # of games to reach a certain level of points.

For example:

Wilt took 492 games to reach 20,000 pts
Jordan 617 games
Kareem 683 games
Bird 797 games
Karl Malone 754 games
Iverson 714 games
Kobe 841 games
Lebron currently has played 514 games and is at 14236 pts and will probally need another 210 games to reach 20000 pts giving him 714 games.


The way Kevin Durant is scoring he may end up there pretty high also.

But they represent two different things...

Yes, LeBron will be the youngest, but could have have got to those milestones faster game wise if he did spend 3-4 years in college first like some of the people above? Think how much better his game would have been before entering the NBA.

So it's kind of silly to point at one being better. What's impressive is how LeBron was able to dominate while being so young, it's kind of foolish to just discount that.

Same could be said for Kobe, a lot people forget that Kobe came off the bench his first two years

So you're excuse for Kobe is he wasn't good enough (he had to come off the bench his first two years). Hardly seems like a good defense...

You said Lebrons game would have been better if he went to college first and I said same with Kobe. Being in college for two years would have helped him better then sitting on the bench for two years.

wes_mantooth wrote: The main reason I would say that Lebron played when he first entered the league is because of how shitty the team was. Also, the one advantage he had over Kobe was that he already had the "NBA body". Athletically Lebron was superior, but bball skill wise, Kobe has superior.

Fly4Fun wrote:

wes_mantooth wrote: The main reason I would say that Lebron played when he first entered the league is because of how shitty the team was. Also, the one advantage he had over Kobe was that he already had the "NBA body". Athletically Lebron was superior, but bball skill wise, Kobe has superior.

Ya, the team was shitty... but honestly, do you think there is any team he wouldn't have been starting for as a rookie.

20.9 pts 5.5 boards and 5.9 assists. .417% from the field and 5.8 FT attempts a game... he's a starter from the beginning.

Fly4Fun wrote: Eh, I really think no matter what team he goes to that year, he's a starter. Probably the most hyped draft entry.... obviously has the body to handle the NBA. Had a great basketball IQ for a rookie... which is one thing that usually holds rookies back.

I think people are forgetting how good he really was/is.

wildcats20 wrote:

Fly4Fun wrote: Eh, I really think no matter what team he goes to that year, he's a starter. Probably the most hyped draft entry.... obviously has the body to handle the NBA. Had a great basketball IQ for a rookie... which is one thing that usually holds rookies back.

I think people are forgetting how good he really was/is.

I'm not forgetting.

03-04 Lakers
Gary Payton
Kobe
Rick Fox
Karl Malone
Shaq

There is no way Phil Jackson is starting a rookie, I don't care who it is, over a vet like Rick Fox who was very vital to the Lakers.

03-04 Pistons
Billups
Rip Hamilton
Tayshaun
Sheed
Ben Wallace

Larry Brown for sure would not start a rookie over any of those guys.

And another thing we have to remember, Bron wasn't "as big" as he is now. He had the body of a 2/3 more than a 3/4, which he has now.

Footwedge wrote: All I know for sure....Lebron will win his second straight MVP barring injury this April. The numbers comparing the King with the ball hog are quite one sided.

wildcats20 wrote: An unproven rookie over a vet who was a vital part of that team? No it would not have happened.

Depending on foul situations(meaning Horace Grant in for Shaq/Malone), Bron would have been the 1st man off the bench.


I'll say this though. If Bron was on that Lakers team, by the time the Finals came around, he might have been starting. And they would not have lost the Finals. LOL

wes_mantooth wrote:

wildcats20 wrote: An unproven rookie over a vet who was a vital part of that team? No it would not have happened.

Depending on foul situations(meaning Horace Grant in for Shaq/Malone), Bron would have been the 1st man off the bench.


I'll say this though. If Bron was on that Lakers team, by the time the Finals came around, he might have been starting. And they would not have lost the Finals. LOL

Zactly. You start the veteran and to be honest, Rick Fox was a pretty solid role player....and you ease the rookie in off the bench.

wes_mantooth wrote: ^^^Maybe, but if him coming off the bench worked for the team.....why mess with it. I mean, that 2nd unit becomes better than a lot of teams starters. Fun to think about.