Every basketball fans have these arguments with the colleagues or friends all the time. Who's better LeBron or Kobe? Chris Paul or Deron Williams? Lakers or Celtics? Well im going to answer some of these questions.
1. Deron Williams vs. Chris Paul
Argument for Chris Paul: Paul is faster, he's been an all-star, and he puts up better numbers. He's also played with less talent around him. Deron Williams has had Carlos Boozer, Memhet Okur, and Andrei Krlenko.
Argument for Deron Williams: The majority of the times Paul and Williams match up Williams gets the better of Paul. Williams has gone farther into the postseason.
Winner: Deron Williams
Analysis: Point guards are much like quarterbacks, and are judged by the level of success they have had throughout their career. The Jazz have been better than the Hornets since Deron Williams arrived. Aside for that Deron Williams is the more complete player. Yes, Paul is a great point guard, but when teams like the Nuggets got physical with him he seemed to be uncomfortable. Deron Williams has the body to handle physical punishment from big point guards like Chauncey Billups. Deron Williams does everything a point guard is supposed to do. He is a great ball handler, a fantastic passer, a solid 3pt shooter, and has a terrific mid-range jumpshot. He also his a great defender.
2. LeBron James vs. Kobe Bryant
Argument for LeBron James: Over the last 3 years he's statistically has been the most productive player in the NBA. He's carried a team to the playoffs and even the NBA finals with no much of a supporting cast. He's the most athletically gifted player in NBA history. He's a better passer than Kobe and is bigger, stronger, and faster.
Argument for Kobe Bryant: He's won 4 championships. He scored 81 points in a game. Has averaged over 35 points per game in a single season. He's the smarter player and is the better 3pt shooter. He's also the better defender and has been in the league longer. Also LeBron James can't shoot.
Winner: LeBron James
Analysis: LeBron player does too much to not be considered the NBA's best player. He's the only player since Michael Jordan that could average 30 points 7 rebonds and 7 assists over a stretch of a few months and still have a winning team. Yes it is true that Kobe is prolific scorer and cannot be stopped when he is on his game, but the same applies to LeBron James. The myth that LeBron can't shoot is clearly false. In career totals LeBron James and Kobe Bryant's three point shooting percentage is only seperated by 1.3%. As a matter of fact Kobe Bryant just like LeBron James only shot over 35% from the three point line in the first 6 years of his career.
3. Boston Celtics vs. Los Angeles Lakers
Argument for Celtics: The Celtics dominant when the Celtics were at full force with Kevin Garnett healthy. The Celtics have too many players to worry about: Rondo, Allen, Pierce, Garnett, Wallace, and House. The Celtics are hands down the NBA's best defensive team. The Celtics have the perfect chemistry seeing that everyone's mind is on winning. The only reason the Celtics didn't win the 2008-2009 championship is that they didn't their best player and the heart of the defense.
Argument for Lakers: It doesn't matter what you did before we are the most recent champions. We played without Andrew Bynum who could have changed the tide in our series against each other. The addition of Ron Artest is only going to make us better. Plus we have the best player in the NBA in Kobe Bryant.
Winner: Boston Celtics
Analysis: The Celtics dominated in their first season with Garnett. Even though they weren't close to perfect in the playoffs, they won every game that they had to win. If you take away Jordan away from the Bulls, Duncan away from the Spurs, Chauncey away from the Pistons, or Kobe away from the Lakers they surely would all falter. With the return of Garnett and the additions of Rasheed Wallace and Marquis Daniels the Celtics clearly are the better team.