Oh monty you will do whatever you can to hate on Jordan. ;) Once again i'm here to save the day and make sense of this topic. I don't think ANYONE could score 100 points in a game through the NATURAL FLOW of the offense. Kobe still had 19 to goand that's 2/3 of his normal avg for a game. It won't happen. Now if you take the NATURAL FLOW out of the game and make it a priority to get someone to shoot every possession, forget kobe or michael, ANY prolific scorer would have a shot.

And for those that don't buy that i have one name for you - David Robinson. He scored 71 points in 1994 but nobody ever talks about it. The reason he did that was cause he needed that many points to overtake shaq for the scoring title that year. So the offense went through him as much as humanly possilble. And lets be real here, David Robinson was a SOLID, AT BEST, offensive player. He was better than Ewing but had nowhere near the skill of Hakeem. So you're telling me that someone like Robinson can put up 74 when the team funnels all the plays through him, but a great scorer like MJ can't? It's all in the approach. Kobe, Tmac in his prime, Durant, maybe even Melo could do it if it was the teams primary goal, like it was for Robinson. But to do it through the natural flow of the game, not buying it - from anyone

let all them keep on losing so boise and tcu can play for the championship and make all of the NCAA higher ups heads explode. It's their worst nightmare. I love it

you all are digging too deep here. One on One has nothing to do with who is better, it's all about percentages. You want the person who is gonna get the easiest shots. Since their talent is on the same level, i will always go with the bigger and more physical person because you can count on them getting higher percentage shots. Lebron could back Kobe all the way down to the rim because of his size, i'm not sure kobe could do the same to lebron. Does this GUARANTEE that Lebron would win? of course not. But it would increase the percentages.

Think about this one, cause i had an argument similar to this nearly 10 years ago. Take the 2 people's names i'm about to mention, and their popularity, out of consideration. I used to argue that i would take Vlade Divac (circa 2001) vs someone like Allen Iverson (of that same year) because of the quality of shots one would get over the other.And my friends called me crazy. Vlade was a good enough ball handler that he could have backed down Iverson without worrying about getting the ball stolen and shoot nothing but layups, while on D Vlade would just stand in the middle of the paint and force Iverson to shoot Jumpers. Once again does this GUARANTEE that Vlade would win? of course not. But the percentages would be way in his favor. Does this mean Vlade is better? No.

Now the size discrepency between Lebron and Kobe is nowhere near that of Vlade and A.I. but he is taller, heavier, stronger and younger, and those are all things that factor in. And once again that wouldn't make lebron better than kobe if he won or vice versa. Just my 2 cents

you all are digging too deep here. One on One has nothing to do with who is better, it's all about percentages. You want the person who is gonna get the easiest shots. Since their talent is on the same level, i will always go with the bigger and more physical person because you can count on them getting higher percentage shots. Lebron could back Kobe all the way down to the rim because of his size, i'm not sure kobe could do the same to lebron. Does this GUARANTEE that Lebron would win? of course not. But it would increase the percentages.

Think about this one, cause i had an argument similar to this nearly 10 years ago. Take the 2 people's names i'm about to mention, and their popularity, out of consideration. I used to argue that i would take Vlade Divac (circa 2001) vs someone like Allen Iverson (of that same year) because of the quality of shots one would get over the other.And my friends called me crazy. Vlade was a good enough ball handler that he could have backed down Iverson without worrying about getting the ball stolen and shoot nothing but layups, while on D Vlade would just stand in the middle of the paint and force Iverson to shoot Jumpers. Once again does this GUARANTEE that Vlade would win? of course not. But the percentages would be way in his favor. Does this mean Vlade is better? No.

Now the size discrepency between Lebron and Kobe is nowhere near that of Vlade and A.I. but he is taller, heavier, stronger and younger, and those are all things that factor in. And once again that wouldn't make lebron better than kobe if he won or vice versa. Just my 2 cents

and he'll be right back on the bench next week

[QUOTE="Lostboy1224"]still waiting for a top ten list of the all-time greatest choke moments in NBA Playoff History. Who would be number 1?-Halftime-

I heard this a couple of days ago. He won't get cut because his name is Colt McCoy, but apparently if he was any other mid round qb with no hype he would be gone. His college greatness looks like it will save him, at least thus far

sounds good to me. i have aaron rodgers as my fantasy qb. Without some of your top defenders out there that means a more likely chance at a shootout, which will be good for Rodgers' numbers.

All i know is that if you are a reviewer and work for Nintendo Power and HONESTLY dislike Mario and Zelda games and bash them in your reviews, good luck keeping your job at THAT magazine. It may not be "bias" but don't tell me that a reviewer who is working at a magazine for a specific company,like nintendo,is not in SOME WAY influenced to give Nintendo games "the benefit of the doubt" to say the least. This is their job, and livelihood, and they aren't going to jeopardize that by consistantly slamming the very games that make the company they are working for, even if the reviewer TRULY doesn't like the games.

i like em all. but 2 is like the best sequal ever made.

ill just rank em

1: terminator 2

2: terminator salvation

3: terminator 3

4: terminator 1