propulsiondj wrote:What is your reason for voting Jason Kidd? Is it because of his undefeated record in these international games?

His record is a plus but Kidd gets my vote because he's a true leader. You put him on a team and you KNOW they're going to improve. People want to play with him.

Satan wrote:

propulsiondj wrote:What is your reason for voting Jason Kidd? Is it because of his undefeated record in these international games?

His record is a plus but Kidd gets my vote because he's a true leader. You put him on a team and you KNOW they're going to improve. People want to play with him.

Yes, and unlike LeBron, another fact is that he's led his team to two NBA finals appearances. Agree?

What kind of leader do you think Kidd is? Lead-by-example type or vocal?

Satan wrote:

propulsiondj wrote:Kobe still led the team to countless victories during those years (especially in the playoffs).

Of course he did. Just like TP and Manu let the Spurs to countless victories over the years but everyone knows the Spurs dominance begins and ends with Tim Duncan.

propulsiondj wrote:If you're gonna use Shaq to dismiss Kobe's leadership, then it is also valid to say 'Bron came out of the very weak Eastern conference where he had to face an Arenas/Butler-less Wizards team, a mediocre Nets team, and a post Ben Wallace-era Pistons team.

Sure, you can say all of that and it's even true. Doesn't change the fact that Bron has led his team to a Finals and Kobe has not.

Then getting to the finals in the east is overrated

propulsiondj wrote:Yes, and unlike LeBron, another fact is that he's led his team to two NBA finals appearances. Agree?

Absolutely. Kidd should have been MVP at least one of those seasons, particularly when you consider the fact that Nash has two.

propulsiondj wrote:What kind of leader do you think Kidd is? Lead-by-example type or vocal?

Both. Kidd never gives up. I've never heard much praise for his physical abilities yet he flirts with a triple double nearly every game, showing that you can get it done with hustle and determination. He makes his teammates much better.

I also see him coaching on the floor. If a teammate gets flustered, he's the one grabbing the guy and talking in his ear to keep him cool and collected. When a game is on the line, you see him gather up his troops and inspire them.

Satan wrote:

propulsiondj wrote:Yes, and unlike LeBron, another fact is that he's led his team to two NBA finals appearances. Agree?

Absolutely. Kidd should have been MVP at least one of those seasons, particularly when you consider the fact that Nash has two.

propulsiondj wrote:What kind of leader do you think Kidd is? Lead-by-example type or vocal?

Both. Kidd never gives up. I've never heard much praise for his physical abilities yet he flirts with a triple double nearly every game, showing that you can get it done with hustle and determination. He makes his teammates much better.

I also see him coaching on the floor. If a teammate gets flustered, he's the one grabbing the guy and talking in his ear to keep him cool and collected. When a game is on the line, you see him gather up his troops and inspire them.

I personally believe that Kidd is a better all around point guard than Nash because of his ability to rebound and play defense. His leadership qualities are just as good as evidenced by his two NBA finals appearances (one of which went to 6 games against the Duncan-Robinson Spurs).

I think Kobe and Kidd should be co-captains. My reasons include Kobe's championship experience and his obvious track record. Kidd for his leadership, his ability to make players around him better, and his playoff experience.

Satan wrote:

propulsiondj wrote:Kobe won 3 titles by the time he was 23.

So did Devon George. What's your point?



His is point is Kobe has 3 rings. Lebron has 0. Fact.

Are you a closet Cavs fan? It's ok, just admit it.

honestly,.. who gives a crap if LeBron claims himself as the leader. I can't believe you people are upset about this.

Whoever said Kobe should have gotten finals MVP in the final championship clearly knows so little. He shot I believe 41% in that series, if anything he could have gotten the finals mvp against the Sixers when he was shooting 51%

but who cares?

Anybody can be a leader, a leader doesn't have to be the best player on the court.

Whoever said playing devils advocate was easy? comparing kobe to georges contribution destroys any credibility in this thread.

solenstyle wrote:honestly,.. who gives a crap if LeBron claims himself as the leader. I can't believe you people are upset about this.

Whoever said Kobe should have gotten finals MVP in the final championship clearly knows so little. He shot I believe 41% in that series, if anything he could have gotten the finals mvp against the Sixers when he was shooting 51%

but who cares?

Anybody can be a leader, a leader doesn't have to be the best player on the court.

Iverson won the season MVP shooting 42% in 2001. Your opinion fails!

Shooting % has very little to do with winning the MVP. It's all about the impact a player has. IMO, Kobe played a huge role in sweeping the Nets in the 2002 finals. He should have at least got co-mvp for his performance.

808LakerFan wrote:

Legend In The Making wrote:

808LakerFan wrote:word?
he cant lead team USA because he can barely lead his own team.
Lead his team in statistics cheyaah but theres a player named Kobe Bryant or/and Jason Kidd that is more fit to have that role.
He was just mad cuz he pulled a George Bush....
...
CHOKED
haha like my punchline?

So I guess LeBron taking the Cavs to the finals means nothing? Ok

No I didn't like your punchline because it didn't make any sense.

wow hater someones got panty rash, lead his team in what? stats

oh and for my punchline, george bush choked on a pretzel once
and i never asked for your FCKN OPINION on it let alone hate.
get up off my jock

I just said he lead his team to the finals.

This is a message board, I don't need permission to respond to a post by you.

o_o

What's going on in here? Choking, panty rashes? We're not on point, and the point is that Kobe is better then Lebron. Kobe is a better shooter, more clutch, a hell of a lot better on defense.

Kobe is the leader of the USA basketball team.

propulsiondj wrote:

solenstyle wrote:honestly,.. who gives a crap if LeBron claims himself as the leader. I can't believe you people are upset about this.

Whoever said Kobe should have gotten finals MVP in the final championship clearly knows so little. He shot I believe 41% in that series, if anything he could have gotten the finals mvp against the Sixers when he was shooting 51%

but who cares?

Anybody can be a leader, a leader doesn't have to be the best player on the court.

Iverson won the season MVP shooting 42% in 2001. Your opinion fails!

Shooting % has very little to do with winning the MVP. It's all about the impact a player has. IMO, Kobe played a huge role in sweeping the Nets in the 2002 finals. He should have at least got co-mvp for his performance.

My mistake, I got the Sixers & Nets years mixed up stat wise... Although you were correct on the year finals mvp (arguably could have gotten it) you're assessment in the shooting pct was wrong. The shooting pct has a lot to do with it... so stop trying to argue that. It means he was more efficient & contributed more on the offensive portion of the win.

Impact?? I'll take an efficient scorer over any day than just the fear a name brings. And actually, the fg% does have a lot of impact so...???? I don't get what you're saying???

wow how can my opinion fail?

here:

NBA Finals

Shaquille O'Neal

2002: 36.3 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 3.8 apg, 2.8 blocks, 59.5% shooting,

Kobe Bryant

2002: 26.7 ppg, 5.2 apg, 5.8 rpg, 1.5 steals, .75 blocks, 51.4% shooting

*It still amazes me why anyone would be upset over this. Who cares who's the leader? We'll just see who plays the best. Leadership can come from off the bench. It just means the leader motivates/protects/etc... to the players.

propulsiondj wrote:I personally believe that Kidd is a better all around point guard than Nash because of his ability to rebound and play defense.

Fo sho, fo sho, Kidd is better than Nash in just about every aspect except shooting. Unfortunately Kidd played his best years at the same time Shaq (and Duncan?) did and he's not white so no MVPs for him.

propulsiondj wrote:I think Kobe and Kidd should be co-captains. My reasons include Kobe's championship experience and his obvious track record. Kidd for his leadership, his ability to make players around him better, and his playoff experience.

I'd certainly go with Kidd and Kobe before I'd go with Kidd and Bron.

solenstyle wrote:

propulsiondj wrote:

solenstyle wrote:honestly,.. who gives a crap if LeBron claims himself as the leader. I can't believe you people are upset about this.

Whoever said Kobe should have gotten finals MVP in the final championship clearly knows so little. He shot I believe 41% in that series, if anything he could have gotten the finals mvp against the Sixers when he was shooting 51%

but who cares?

Anybody can be a leader, a leader doesn't have to be the best player on the court.

Iverson won the season MVP shooting 42% in 2001. Your opinion fails!

Shooting % has very little to do with winning the MVP. It's all about the impact a player has. IMO, Kobe played a huge role in sweeping the Nets in the 2002 finals. He should have at least got co-mvp for his performance.

My mistake, I got the Sixers & Nets years mixed up stat wise... Although you were correct on the year finals mvp (arguably could have gotten it) you're assessment in the shooting pct was wrong. The shooting pct has a lot to do with it... so stop trying to argue that. It means he was more efficient & contributed more on the offensive portion of the win.

Impact?? I'll take an efficient scorer over any day than just the fear a name brings. And actually, the fg% does have a lot of impact so...???? I don't get what you're saying???

wow how can my opinion fail?

here:

NBA Finals

Shaquille O'Neal

2002: 36.3 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 3.8 apg, 2.8 blocks, 59.5% shooting,

Kobe Bryant

2002: 26.7 ppg, 5.2 apg, 5.8 rpg, 1.5 steals, .75 blocks, 51.4% shooting

*It still amazes me why anyone would be upset over this. Who cares who's the leader? We'll just see who plays the best. Leadership can come from off the bench. It just means the leader motivates/protects/etc... to the players.

Top 5 players to lead the league in fg% this year:
1. Mikki Moore
2. Dwight Howard
3. Andris Biedrins
4. Eddy Curry
5. Amare Stoudemire

None of them are even close to MVP caliber players. Sorry, your opinion fails again.

Leader pecking order:

1. Kidd
2. Kobe
3. Chauncey
.
.
.
100. Everyone else.

lakerskobe247 wrote:He called himself NUMBER ONE leader of the team. Nothing wrong with that?

One word: LeBronze.

Moises wrote:Leader pecking order:

1. Kidd
2. Kobe
3. Chauncey
.
.
.
100. Everyone else.

propulsiondj wrote:

solenstyle wrote:

propulsiondj wrote:

solenstyle wrote:honestly,.. who gives a crap if LeBron claims himself as the leader. I can't believe you people are upset about this.

Whoever said Kobe should have gotten finals MVP in the final championship clearly knows so little. He shot I believe 41% in that series, if anything he could have gotten the finals mvp against the Sixers when he was shooting 51%

but who cares?

Anybody can be a leader, a leader doesn't have to be the best player on the court.

Iverson won the season MVP shooting 42% in 2001. Your opinion fails!

Shooting % has very little to do with winning the MVP. It's all about the impact a player has. IMO, Kobe played a huge role in sweeping the Nets in the 2002 finals. He should have at least got co-mvp for his performance.

My mistake, I got the Sixers & Nets years mixed up stat wise... Although you were correct on the year finals mvp (arguably could have gotten it) you're assessment in the shooting pct was wrong. The shooting pct has a lot to do with it... so stop trying to argue that. It means he was more efficient & contributed more on the offensive portion of the win.

Impact?? I'll take an efficient scorer over any day than just the fear a name brings. And actually, the fg% does have a lot of impact so...???? I don't get what you're saying???

wow how can my opinion fail?

here:

NBA Finals

Shaquille O'Neal

2002: 36.3 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 3.8 apg, 2.8 blocks, 59.5% shooting,

Kobe Bryant

2002: 26.7 ppg, 5.2 apg, 5.8 rpg, 1.5 steals, .75 blocks, 51.4% shooting

*It still amazes me why anyone would be upset over this. Who cares who's the leader? We'll just see who plays the best. Leadership can come from off the bench. It just means the leader motivates/protects/etc... to the players.

Top 5 players to lead the league in fg% this year:
1. Mikki Moore
2. Dwight Howard
3. Andris Biedrins
4. Eddy Curry
5. Amare Stoudemire

None of them are even close to MVP caliber players. Sorry, your opinion fails again.

hahahaha and??? out of those players, who is actually MVP status???

I said fg% has a hand into the overall player's performance. You think I'm saying whoever has the best fg% should be granted MVP?? Wow...Who were the last MVPs??? Dirk & Nash... They shoot more efficient than Kobe... that goes along with their overall performance in assists/reb/steals/turnovers/etc... along with their team's performance. Shooting efficiently is a positive impact on the teams' performance... you make more with less shots, the better. Just like LeBron sucked in the finals... going what? 35 or so % He didn't help on the offensive portion as much as the best player should.

You are obviously confused man.

solenstyle wrote:

propulsiondj wrote:

solenstyle wrote:

propulsiondj wrote:

solenstyle wrote:honestly,.. who gives a crap if LeBron claims himself as the leader. I can't believe you people are upset about this.

Whoever said Kobe should have gotten finals MVP in the final championship clearly knows so little. He shot I believe 41% in that series, if anything he could have gotten the finals mvp against the Sixers when he was shooting 51%

but who cares?

Anybody can be a leader, a leader doesn't have to be the best player on the court.

Iverson won the season MVP shooting 42% in 2001. Your opinion fails!

Shooting % has very little to do with winning the MVP. It's all about the impact a player has. IMO, Kobe played a huge role in sweeping the Nets in the 2002 finals. He should have at least got co-mvp for his performance.

My mistake, I got the Sixers & Nets years mixed up stat wise... Although you were correct on the year finals mvp (arguably could have gotten it) you're assessment in the shooting pct was wrong. The shooting pct has a lot to do with it... so stop trying to argue that. It means he was more efficient & contributed more on the offensive portion of the win.

Impact?? I'll take an efficient scorer over any day than just the fear a name brings. And actually, the fg% does have a lot of impact so...???? I don't get what you're saying???

wow how can my opinion fail?

here:

NBA Finals

Shaquille O'Neal

2002: 36.3 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 3.8 apg, 2.8 blocks, 59.5% shooting,

Kobe Bryant

2002: 26.7 ppg, 5.2 apg, 5.8 rpg, 1.5 steals, .75 blocks, 51.4% shooting

*It still amazes me why anyone would be upset over this. Who cares who's the leader? We'll just see who plays the best. Leadership can come from off the bench. It just means the leader motivates/protects/etc... to the players.

Top 5 players to lead the league in fg% this year:
1. Mikki Moore
2. Dwight Howard
3. Andris Biedrins
4. Eddy Curry
5. Amare Stoudemire

None of them are even close to MVP caliber players. Sorry, your opinion fails again.

hahahaha and??? out of those players, who is actually MVP status???

I said fg% has a hand into the overall player's performance. You think I'm saying whoever has the best fg% should be granted MVP?? Wow...Who were the last MVPs??? Dirk & Nash... They shoot more efficient than Kobe... that goes along with their overall performance in assists/reb/steals/turnovers/etc... along with their team's performance. Shooting efficiently is a positive impact on the teams' performance... you make more with less shots, the better. Just like LeBron sucked in the finals... going what? 35 or so % He didn't help on the offensive portion as much as the best player should.

You are obviously confused man.

See bold text. You just contradicted yourself.

Kobe is a shooting guard. How many SGs out there can score 53% on a regular basis? Are you saying that Kobe is not an efficient player? Do you watch basketball? Kobe's always at the top of the league in scoring, defense, ft%, carrying his team to victories, and clutch performances. Being a MVP is no t just about stats like you said - it also factors the intangibles that Kobe has and Nash/Nowitzki don't. Are you telling me Steve "can't play defense" Nash and Dirk "can't make clutch free throws" Nowitzki are more efficient?

No sir, I think YOU are confused.

"He adds another leader to our team, and he's going to help a lot," James says. "It's not about me competing with him. It's about us coming together to try to win a gold medal."

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketba ... over_N.htm

So basically making something out of nothing.

propulsiondj wrote:

solenstyle wrote:

propulsiondj wrote:

solenstyle wrote:

propulsiondj wrote:

solenstyle wrote:honestly,.. who gives a crap if LeBron claims himself as the leader. I can't believe you people are upset about this.

Whoever said Kobe should have gotten finals MVP in the final championship clearly knows so little. He shot I believe 41% in that series, if anything he could have gotten the finals mvp against the Sixers when he was shooting 51%

but who cares?

Anybody can be a leader, a leader doesn't have to be the best player on the court.

Iverson won the season MVP shooting 42% in 2001. Your opinion fails!

Shooting % has very little to do with winning the MVP. It's all about the impact a player has. IMO, Kobe played a huge role in sweeping the Nets in the 2002 finals. He should have at least got co-mvp for his performance.

My mistake, I got the Sixers & Nets years mixed up stat wise... Although you were correct on the year finals mvp (arguably could have gotten it) you're assessment in the shooting pct was wrong. The shooting pct has a lot to do with it... so stop trying to argue that. It means he was more efficient & contributed more on the offensive portion of the win.

Impact?? I'll take an efficient scorer over any day than just the fear a name brings. And actually, the fg% does have a lot of impact so...???? I don't get what you're saying???

wow how can my opinion fail?

here:

NBA Finals

Shaquille O'Neal

2002: 36.3 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 3.8 apg, 2.8 blocks, 59.5% shooting,

Kobe Bryant

2002: 26.7 ppg, 5.2 apg, 5.8 rpg, 1.5 steals, .75 blocks, 51.4% shooting

*It still amazes me why anyone would be upset over this. Who cares who's the leader? We'll just see who plays the best. Leadership can come from off the bench. It just means the leader motivates/protects/etc... to the players.

Top 5 players to lead the league in fg% this year:
1. Mikki Moore
2. Dwight Howard
3. Andris Biedrins
4. Eddy Curry
5. Amare Stoudemire

None of them are even close to MVP caliber players. Sorry, your opinion fails again.

hahahaha and??? out of those players, who is actually MVP status???

I said fg% has a hand into the overall player's performance. You think I'm saying whoever has the best fg% should be granted MVP?? Wow...Who were the last MVPs??? Dirk & Nash... They shoot more efficient than Kobe... that goes along with their overall performance in assists/reb/steals/turnovers/etc... along with their team's performance. Shooting efficiently is a positive impact on the teams' performance... you make more with less shots, the better. Just like LeBron sucked in the finals... going what? 35 or so % He didn't help on the offensive portion as much as the best player should.

You are obviously confused man.

See bold text. You just contradicted yourself.

Kobe is a shooting guard. How many SGs out there can score 53% on a regular basis? Are you saying that Kobe is not an efficient player? Do you watch basketball? Kobe's always at the top of the league in scoring, defense, ft%, carrying his team to victories, and clutch performances. Being a MVP is no t just about stats like you said - it also factors the intangibles that Kobe has and Nash/Nowitzki don't. Are you telling me Steve "can't play defense" Nash and Dirk "can't make clutch free throws" Nowitzki are more efficient?

No sir, I think YOU are confused.

wait wait... you think I'm saying Kobe isn't efficient??? No, that's not what I said. I said Nash & Nowitzki were more efficient in terms of scoring... I didn't say Kobe wasn't efficient. Don't bring up leadership.. please. I'm done, I bring up something, then you ignore and bring up other qualities in which I wasn't talking about!! I'm talking about scoring efficiently. Kobe does it, Nash does it, Dirk does it... Kobe didn't do it in the finals except for that 2002 Nets year... and it does go along with a person's overall performance when talking about MVP.

The bold part... Yes, I said I was wrong on the Sixers part. It was against the Nets where he shot very well. That was the only year where he shot well in the finals overall. It has a lot to do with it when picking finals mvp... It means he helped a lot on the offensive portion of the win as I stated before. Look there's no point in arguing

solenstyle wrote:wait wait... you think I'm saying Kobe isn't efficient???

Yes!

solenstyle wrote:No, that's not what I said.

Yes you did. Proof:

solenstyle wrote:Wow...Who were the last MVPs??? Dirk & Nash... They shoot more efficient than Kobe... that goes along with their overall performance in assists/reb/steals/turnovers/etc... along with their team's performance. Shooting efficiently is a positive impact on the teams' performance... you make more with less shots, the better.

solenstyle wrote:I'm talking about scoring efficiently. Kobe does it, Nash does it, Dirk does it... Kobe didn't do it in the finals except for that 2002 Nets year... and it does go along with a person's overall performance when talking about MVP.

This post made more sense. That is why I presented the case that Kobe should have gotten consideration for co-mvp at least.

solenstyle wrote:Whoever said Kobe should have gotten finals MVP in the final championship clearly knows so little. He shot I believe 41% in that series, if anything he could have gotten the finals mvp against the Sixers when he was shooting 51%

solenstyle wrote:My mistake, I got the Sixers & Nets years mixed up stat wise...

uh huh

solenstyle wrote:Look there's no point in arguing

I won ....

I said Kobe didn't shoot more efficient than Nash or Dirk. I didn't say he wasn't efficient. You misinterpreted my words.

Kobe 46.3% 34.4 % 3pt

Nash 53.3% 45.5 % 3pt

Dirk 50.2% 41.6 % 3pt

so you didn't win... I just got tired of debating lol

solenstyle wrote:Impact?? I'll take an efficient scorer over any day than just the fear a name brings. And actually, the fg% does have a lot of impact so...???? I don't get what you're saying???

So you're saying Kobe didn't make an impact in the '01 finals and '00 finals because his fg% was not up to par with your standards?