![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I don't know why Kobe is compared to Jordan, he had Shaq who is the most dominant player to ever play the game. While Jordan led a bulls dynasty that is the only dominant team in NBA history that didn't have a dominant inside prescence. Watching LA this year it's prety clear that was Shaqs team.
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
It's a stretch to say the Shaq was the most dominating player ever....you could easily make the case that Chamberlin was more dominating....Jordan too....
In fact, if jordan's bulls were the only dynasty without a dominating big man, that might be all the evidence you need to say he was the most dominant player to ever play the game....shaq didnt win when jordan was in the league, and when he was out, olajuwon in his prime schooled him....shaq never won a title until Kobe came into his own, and over those title runs, Kobe took most of the big shots in the big games near the end.
__________________
https://secure.pokerchamps.com/pokerpublic/arequest?acode=JIMMYTHEG |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
with the same type of argument, you can clearly downgrade jordan because he didnt come close to winning a title until pippen became a star. shaq at least made it to the finals without kobe (he did have penny), but jordan never got out of the east without pippen at his side.
chamberlin was spectacular, but he NEVER beat russell, so it is difficult to say that he was the most dominating in his own time, nevermind ever. i am not sure who was, but it seems like shaq cant be dismissed from the argument. Last edited by eddo31; 11-24-04 at 12:29 PM. |
![]() |
|
|