Would Kobe's legacy look better if he had this career arc?

[Magic 32]

1996-2002 = The number 1 guy on a crappy team.

2003-2009 = The number 1 guy on a contending "top 5'ish" team.

2010-2013 = On a contending team as a second/third option.

???

[SilkkTheShocker]

Still not better than LeBron.

[Magic 32]

Still not better than LeBron.

not the question.

[TonyMontana]

It would look worse than LeBrons, so the same

[LongLiveTheKing]

Maybe if he was actually good as a rookie or 2nd year player. It took him 3 seasons to average 20 points. :lol

[Magic 32]

Lots of agitated Lebron stans. :pimp:

Any serious answers though?

[Unbiased_one]

1996-2002 = The number 1 guy on a crappy team.

2003-2009 = The number 1 guy on a contending "top 5'ish" team.

2010-2013 = On a contending team as a second/third option.

???

In his first couple of years kobe probably wasn't capable of leading a team (he wasn't even a starter after all). It would have been interesting to watch.

But we have no idea.

EDIT: the first two posts are about LeBron...typical ISH.

[KyrieTheFuture]

I would have to say no only because top 5 team is a pretty wide margin between teams...top 2? That would change it

[Magic 32]

In his first couple of years kobe probably wasn't capable of leading a team (he wasn't even a starter after all). But we have no idea. Hypotheticals like this are useless.

In his second year he could probably be accepted like Wall is in Washington.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzMWKo0uDu8

And I think this is an interesting question.

[IncarceratedBob]

Maybe if he was actually good as a rookie or 2nd year player. It took him 3 seasons to average 20 points. :lol
How long did it take LeBron to win a ring..lol

[asdf1990]

in this arc does he still have big's carrying him to rings? you gotta be more specific

[Magic 32]

I would have to say no only because top 5 team is a pretty wide margin between teams...top 2? That would change it

Well, outside of Kobe, his 08-10 teams were not definitely better than everyone else's.

[Magic 32]

in this arc does he still have big's carrying him to rings? you gotta be more specific

Well, if he can get the guy who is 0-12 without him in the playoff, sure.

[K Xerxes]

Well, he wouldn't be first option on really any team for his first few years. He just wasn't that good coming out of high school, even in the minutes he played.

From 00/01 onwards, he'd have filled the stat sheet and not really gone anywhere, been a top 5 player every year though. No rings at all.

Then you're looking at probably a similar story from 05 to the end of his career. 2 rings, 2 FMVP, 1 MVP... not a more impressive resume than the one he currently has.

I don't know about other people, but I actually value the three rings he had with Shaq. To cast them away as sidekick rings is ludicrous (except maybe the first), but he was in a 1a/b situation with Shaq in 00 and 01.

Does that mean he would be any better on a crappy team? Not really.

For me, he stays a locked in top 11 player of all time, strong convo for top 10. However, I don't really look at accomplishments as much as the next person, so I'd value his ability on the court, which wouldn't change regardless of the team he has.

[Magic 32]

I don't know about other people, but I actually value the three rings he had with Shaq. To cast them away as sidekick rings is ludicrous (except maybe the first), but he was in a 1a/b situation with Shaq in 00 and 01.



Well, they do him no good in the top 15 discussions.

And I do think that he would have accumulated more than 1 regular season MVP.

The way he played in 03, 06 and 07.

[red1]

In the long run, winning those three rings with shaq will play a huge role in his ranking. So no, his legacy absolutely would not be better in the scenario you presented

[Fresh Kid]

True, but how many rings Shaq would have if kobe didnt help him get three?

[DMAVS41]

Kobe's career is boosted by his rings. Saying otherwise is absurd.

Kobe's level of play alone puts him roughly in the 10 to 12 range all time. The only way you get him higher is with rings and longevity. And being the best player on his team early on would have yielded less rings and likely hurt his longevity as carrying a bigger load would have likely added too much wear and tear for him to play at the level he has (when healthy) the last few years.

[2LeTTeRS]

Well, they do him no good in the top 15 discussions.

And I do think that he would have accumulated more than 1 regular season MVP.

The way he played in 03, 06 and 07.


How can a poster with the username Magic32 criticize anyone for success with a legendary big man. Talk about hypocrisy.....

[kennethgriffin]

Still not better than LeBron.


kobes career is still better than lebrons


3 more mvps doesnt make up for 3 less titles



its about # of rings by mvp winners. not number of mvps by ring winners



moses malones 3 mvps, 1 ring is routinely ranked well below shaq, hakeem, kobe, duncan who have less mvps and more rings



now sit down before ya fall down playa :lol

[Magic 32]

In the long run, winning those three rings with shaq will play a huge role in his ranking. So no, his legacy absolutely would not be better in the scenario you presented

But 03-07 was pretty much a waste, in part because of the Shaq era.

Surely whatever he could have achieved between 03-07 would be better than 3 "sidekick rings"

Lets say 2 MVPs, 3 rings and 3 FMVP's.

Very few rank him with other 3 time "first option" winners anyway (Magic, Jordan, Bird, Shaq, Russell, Kareem, Duncan).

[K Xerxes]

Well, they do him no good in the top 15 discussions.

Yes they do, who are you trying to convince though?

Knowledgeable fans will value them. Casual fans will not care - they will either say 'Kobe sucks, not top 20 lol' or, on the other end, 'Kobe is top 3, he has 5 rings lol'. They don't know anything.


And I do think that he would have accumulated more than 1 regular season MVP.

The way he played in 03, 06 and 07.

He sure as hell isn't winning 03. That was peak Duncan's year.

I'll give you 06 and 07. He might have won one of those two in addition to his 08 with a better team, if not both of them. But that's as far as I'll go: Kobe was the best player in the game from the 06-08 period. He deserved no other MVPs.

So, maximum I'm looking at is 2 rings, 2 FMVP, 3 MVPs. Is that actually more impressive than his current resume?Is 2 more MVPs worth 3 more rings, given that he played a very important role in all 3, and extremely pivotal in 2 (01 and 02)? I'd say no.

[DMAVS41]

But 03-07 was pretty much a waste, in part because of the Shaq era.

Surely whatever he could have achieved between 03-07 would be better than 3 "sidekick rings"

Lets say 2 MVPs, 3 rings and 3 FMVP's.

Very few ranks him with other 3 times "first option" winners anyway (Magic, Jordan, Bird, Shaq, Russell, Kareem, Duncan).

Under what circumstances is Kobe winning 3 rings from 03 through 07?

He couldn't get it done with Shaq in 03 and 04...so pretending he is winning without him those years is silly. He in no way was good enough to win the title in 05.

In 06 he quit on his team in a game 7.

In 07 he was pretty great.

How much help does Kobe have during this time? Does he just happen to have by far the most help or something? I mean...it's a little silly to just talk about piling up MVP's and such.

[Magic 32]

and likely hurt his longevity as carrying a bigger load would have likely added too much wear and tear for him to play at the level he has (when healthy) the last few years.

I think by 2001, he was pretty much doing first option work load in the regular season.

Especially when Shaq "healed on company time" in 2003.

[MastaKilla]

Kobe's career is boosted by his rings. Saying otherwise is absurd.

Kobe's level of play alone puts him roughly in the 10 to 12 range all time. The only way you get him higher is with rings and longevity.


You act like rings and longevity is something that just gets handed out.

Here's a thought, his "level of play" is the reason for his rings & longevity

You act like Kobes level of play is somehow unrelated to his championships and continued success

[NBASTATMAN]

I think by 2001, he was pretty much doing first option work load in the regular season.

Especially when Shaq "healed on company time" in 2003.


WITHOUT SHAQ THE LAKERS WERE 5-10 :roll:

[DMAVS41]

I think by 2001, he was pretty much doing first option work load in the regular season.

Especially when Shaq "healed on company time" in 2003.

Pretty much? Sure...but that was 4 years into his career already. And playing with a guy like Shaq takes a huge burden off no matter how many shots a player takes. 8 years with prime Shaq just helps longevity in my opinion.

I just don't get this talk honestly.

You could say the same about so many players of this era. You separate players ultimately by level of play and impact. What would KG's career be like if he played with Kobe's help and vice versa is actually a more compelling discussion.

Postulating what Kobe would have done as the best player on stacked teams without Shaq is kind of silly. He would have been great and his team would have won a lot of games. Every great player of the era would have done that....Duncan, Shaq, Dirk, KG, Kobe, Lebron, Wade...

You give those guys top 2 or 3 supporting casts and you are going to get great results in both the regular season and playoffs overall.

[Jacks3]

It would look better. He doesn't get any credit for those 3 rings with Shaq, so his career would have definitely looked better if he had his own team from the beginning. He'd still have multiple rings/Finals appearances as "the man" but also:

Much better career numbers. Instead of 26/5/5/2 he'd probably be somewhere around 30/6/5/2.
Much better post-season numbers.
Another MVP award or 2.
Far more 40+, 50+, 60+ pt games. Right now hes at 120/25/5. With his own team from the beginning of his career, he'd probably be at around 180-90/40/9-12.

Damn shame he was stuck with Shaq for 8 seasons.

Could have been a top 5 player all-time instead of merely top 10.

[Magic 32]

He couldn't get it done with Shaq in 03 and 04...so pretending he is winning without him those years is silly. He in no way was good enough to win the title in 05.


Worked himself into the ground in 2003. And if he plays at 2003 level without the wear and tear of 3 title runs, I think he can get far (and maybe win the MVP).



In 06 he quit on his team in a game 7.


Not if he played on a good team (which is the premise of this thread).



How much help does Kobe have during this time? Does he just happen to have by far the most help or something? I mean...it's a little silly to just talk about piling up MVP's and such.

Let's say he has as much help as he did in 09 and 10.

[LongLiveTheKing]

It would look better. He doesn't get any credit for those 3 rings with Shaq, so his career would have definitely looked better if he had his own team from the beginning. He'd still have multiple rings/Finals appearances as "the man" but also:

Much better career numbers. Instead of 26/5/5/2 he'd probably be somewhere around 30/6/5/2.
Much better post-season numbers.
Another MVP award or 2.
Far more 40+, 50+, 60+ pt games. Right now hes at 120/25/5. With his own team from the beginning of his career, he'd probably be at around 180-90/40/9-12.

Damn shame he was stuck with Shaq for 8 seasons.

Could have been a top 5 player all-time instead of merely top 10.
Except he wouldn't have won his first 3 titles without Shaq.

[DMAVS41]

You act like rings and longevity is something that just gets handed out.

Here's a thought, his "level of play" is the reason for his rings & longevity

You act like Kobes level of play is somehow unrelated to his championships and continued success

Not at all.

But this is talking about removing those rings and his level of play isn't changing.

So how is it better? Because he might have a 2 ppg higher career scoring average? Who cares?

It's not given out, but if you gave a guy like KG or Dirk or Wade or Lebron or Duncan or Shaq the kind of help Kobe has had throughout his career...the results would also be great. It's just a non point. Give the best players the most help and you are going to get a lot of wins in the playoffs and regular season.

Does that mean they all win as much as Kobe? Nope. Some might win less...some might win more...but part of winning a ring is absolutely handed out in these terms. Kobe was great, but his situation was also great as well. and it's not just Kobe. same with other great players like magic and bird and shaq...etc.

[DMAVS41]

Worked himself into the ground in 2003. And if he plays at 2003 level without the wear and tear of 3 title runs, I think he can get far (and maybe win the MVP).



Not if he played on a good team (which is the premise of this thread).



Let's say he has as much help as he did in 09 and 10.

A ton of success. Just like all the best players of this era would have had. So it means very little to me.

Give Dirk that same kind of help (not arguing Dirk is better than Kobe) and he's going to win a lot and definitely win multiple championships.

So it's kind of meh to me. You'd get the results you expect. Give an all time great player great help...and you are going to win.

[Magic 32]

Pretty much? Sure...but that was 4 years into his career already. And playing with a guy like Shaq takes a huge burden off no matter how many shots a player takes. 8 years with prime Shaq just helps longevity in my opinion.

I just don't get this talk honestly.

You could say the same about so many players of this era. You separate players ultimately by level of play and impact. What would KG's career be like if he played with Kobe's help and vice versa is actually a more compelling discussion.

Postulating what Kobe would have done as the best player on stacked teams without Shaq is kind of silly. He would have been great and his team would have won a lot of games. Every great player of the era would have done that....Duncan, Shaq, Dirk, KG, Kobe, Lebron, Wade...

You give those guys top 2 or 3 supporting casts and you are going to get great results in both the regular season and playoffs overall.


Compared to Vince, TMac and AI, of course he has been lucky to have the career he has had.

Be compared with other top 10'ish players?

Jordan, Magic, Bird, Duncan, Russell, Lebron, Shaq were all on great teams for long stretches of their prime.

[Jacks3]

Except he wouldn't have won his first 3 titles without Shaq.
I was talking about the multiple rings with Pau.

And Kobe was already a top 3 player in the league in 2001 by age 22.

He was already easily capable of being the #1 on a Championship team by that point. He could have easily won more rings at the #1. You're kidding yourself if you think the Lakers organization couldn't have built around him.

[LosScandalous]

If he had a top 5 roster with his true prime (03-09 postseason, 7 full seasons) every single season, he would of won a ring almost every single year. At least 5 rings more likely 6, 7 a possibility.

So by your criteria 96-02' would have been the statpadding/try hard years which is acceptable on a bad roster. During that time we would have saw just a young man shine but with little success. Meaningless years but it will show how great he really is.

One of the best things about Kobe's career is his ability to be great at an older age with a ton of minutes/wear and tear on his body. It shows how much he loves the game and shows how much work and effort he puts in the game just to win.

If he takes a back seat in 2010-2013 (ages 31-34) it hurts his legacy. It shows he declined and or his passion of the game dissolved a little bit. Maybe he went ring chasing who knows because you didn't say he had to play for The Lakers.

I think by your criteria it would benefit Bryant's legacy greatly by the fact he now wins a bunch of rings as a lone number 1 option in his prime.

It's loosely similar to Shaq's career timeline arc and people don't bash on Shaq for taking a 2nd option in 2006 and for being a 3rd/4th option in the later years of his career.

[Jacks3]

It would look better. He doesn't get any credit for those 3 rings with Shaq, so his career would have definitely looked better if he had his own team from the beginning. He'd still have multiple rings/Finals appearances as "the man" but also:

Much better career numbers. Instead of 26/5/5/2 he'd probably be somewhere around 30/6/5/2.
Much better post-season numbers.
Another MVP award or 2.
Far more 40+, 50+, 60+ pt games. Right now hes at 120/25/5. With his own team from the beginning of his career, he'd probably be at around 180-90/40/9-12.

Damn shame he was stuck with Shaq for 8 seasons.

Could have been a top 5 player all-time instead of merely top 10.
Oh yeah, and more rings as the #1 from 01-08 possibly. I don't see the Lakers organization failing to put a appropriate supporting cast around a transcendent talent like Kobe.

[DMAVS41]

Compared to Vince, TMac and AI, of course he has been lucky to have the career he has had.

Be compared with other top 10'ish players?

Jordan, Magic, Bird, Duncan, Russell, Lebron, Shaq were all on great teams for long stretches of their prime.

Kobe definitely has played with overall more help than Duncan and Lebron. But I agree other guys played with a ton of help as well.

Which is why I don't like using rings so heavily in these arguments. You put truly great players on great teams and you are going to win a lot...

[LongLiveTheKing]

I was talking about the multiple rings with Pau.

And Kobe was already a top 3 player in the league in 2001 by age 22.

He was already easily capable of being the #1 on a Championship team by that point. He could have easily won more rings at the #1. You're kidding yourself if you think the Lakers organization couldn't have built around him.
Theirs no way Kobe would've won a championship alone that early, it took him 12 years to lead a team on his own to a championship. It would take him a long time to win considering it took him about 5 years to become and elite player and he dropped off slightly in 2002.

[K Xerxes]

Compared to Vince, TMac and AI, of course he has been lucky to have the career he has had.

Be compared with other top 10'ish players?

Jordan, Magic, Bird, Duncan, Russell, Lebron, Shaq were all on great teams for long stretches of their prime.

I say Kobe's prime is from 01-10 ish.

He was on contending team from 01-04 (2 titles).

Crap team from 05-07.

Contending team from 08-10 (2 titles).

So, yes, it's a shame that 2 of his 3 peak years, he spent with a crap team. But he won 2 years at the beginning of his prime as a second option, and won 2 titles as the first option at the end of his prime.

I say Kobe hasn't had it that bad.

[DMAVS41]

Oh yeah, and more rings as the #1 from 01-08 possibly. I don't see the Lakers organization failing to put a appropriate supporting cast around a transcendent talent like Kobe.

Again. You could say that about so many other players. That is the problem.

Duncan and Shaq were better than Kobe years from 00 through 05. Then you had guys like Dirk and Wade and Lebron for years after. KG deserves mention as well.

In this hypothetical. What kind of teams do all those guys have?

The problem with all of this is that what years was Kobe really the best player in the league? I think you could argue 06, 07, and 08. I personally believe he was the best in 07 and 08...so it would depend on what the other elite or best players had in terms of help.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Kobe's career is boosted by his rings. Saying otherwise is absurd.

Kobe's level of play alone puts him roughly in the 10 to 12 range all time. The only way you get him higher is with rings and longevity. And being the best player on his team early on would have yielded less rings and likely hurt his longevity as carrying a bigger load would have likely added too much wear and tear for him to play at the level he has (when healthy) the last few years.

Who are the top 11 players who best Kobe all time (not counting rings and longevity)?

or do they get to keep their rings vs Kobe with no rings?

[KG215]

Compared to Vince, TMac and AI, of course he has been lucky to have the career he has had.

Be compared with other top 10'ish players?

Jordan, Magic, Bird, Duncan, Russell, Lebron, Shaq were all on great teams for long stretches of their prime.
Those players were their team's best player the minute they stepped on an NBA court. There's a decent chance that wouldn't have been the case with Kobe even if he hadn't been drafted on a team with prime Shaq. So I don't know what Kobe's help would've looked like in comparison to those if he had been drafted by a worse team. There's actually a pretty good chance if, say, he goes top 5 in that draft to a bad enough team, the team stays bad enough for another season or two to get a couple more top 3/5/10 picks. And if they make the right pick, you could've built a pretty good team around Kobe just through the draft alone.

[Jacks3]

Theirs no way Kobe would've won a championship alone that early, it took him 12 years to lead a team on his own to a championship. .
lol what? It took him twelve years because he stuck behind Shaq than when he finally got his own team he had to play with the likes of Kwame Brown/Smush Parer/Luke Walton/Odom/Mihm. A historically bad supporting cast.

Like I said, Kobe by 2001 was already a top 3 player.

29/6/5/2 on excellent efficiency during the regular season (+3.5).
29+/7+/6+/2+ on even better efficiency during the post-season (+4.4).

He was the best offensive player in the league not named Shaq and a terrific defender as well.

Give him a good supporting cast and he's easily contending.

[Magic 32]

I say Kobe's prime is from 01-10 ish.

He was on contending team from 01-04 (2 titles).

Crap team from 05-07.

Contending team from 08-10 (2 titles).

So, yes, it's a shame that 2 of his 3 peak years, he spent with a crap team. But he won 2 years at the beginning of his prime as a second option, and won 2 titles as the first option at the end of his prime.

I say Kobe hasn't had it that bad.

I agree. Maybe I should have said peak instead (and that applies to those players as well).

Hakeem, Wilt, Kareem and Oscar were in the same boat though.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Those players were their team's best player the minute they stepped on an NBA court. There's a decent chance that wouldn't have been the case with Kobe even if he hadn't been drafted on a team with prime Shaq.

They were also 21, 20, 23, 21, 22, 18 and 20.

How many 18 year olds were better than 18 year old Kobe? Lebron? Is that it?

:confusedshrug:

[Magic 32]

WITHOUT SHAQ THE LAKERS WERE 5-10 :roll:

Kobe played some of his best basketball in those games.

No Shaq, dismal and out of shape teammates (the worst supporting cast of the Shaq/Kobe run).

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200211010LAC.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200211030LAL.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200211150LAL.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200211170LAL.html

[DMAVS41]

Who are the top 11 players who best Kobe all time (not counting rings and longevity)?

or do they get to keep their rings vs Kobe with no rings?

In terms of level of play I think;

MJ
Russell
Wilt
Magic
Kareem
Bird
Shaq
Lebron
Hakeem
Duncan

All deserve to be ranked over Kobe.

[Magic 32]

In terms of level of play I think;

MJ
Russell
Wilt
Magic
Kareem
Bird
Shaq
Lebron
Hakeem
Duncan

All deserve to be ranked over Kobe.

You don't think 06 Kobe, on a great team, would be in that company?

[Yao Ming's Foot]

In terms of level of play I think;

MJ
Russell
Wilt
Magic
Kareem
Bird
Shaq
Lebron
Hakeem
Duncan

All deserve to be ranked over Kobe.

You don't think its odd that your list based on "level of play" disregarding championships and longevity is pretty much in line with the consensus top 12 of all time including championships and longevity.

:confusedshrug:

What does "level of play" mean exactly?

[TonyMontana]

lol @ rings. Horry has 7.

Kobe has 2 Finals MVPs and 1 of them is *(asteriked) because Pau Gasol should have got it in 2010. LeBron already has matched him at age 28.

Kobes other 3 titles are coattail titles he got from playing with the MDE Prime Shaq. You give LeBron prime Shaq for 3 random years from 2005-2011 and he wins the title all of those years too. Not to mention Kobe had him for 8 years.

Anyone that thinks Kobe is on LeBrons level is a moron. LeBron is top 10(maybe top 5) and will only increase as his career continues. Kobe isn't in the conversation. He should be compared to Wade as they are in the same tier.

[longtime lurker]

lol @ rings. Horry has 7.

Kobe has 2 Finals MVPs and 1 of them is *(asteriked) because Pau Gasol should have got it in 2010. LeBron already has matched him at age 28.

Kobes other 3 titles are coattail titles he got from playing with the MDE Prime Shaq. You give LeBron prime Shaq for 3 random years from 2005-2011 and he wins the title all of those years too. Not to mention Kobe had him for 8 years.

[B]]Anyone that thinks Kobe is on LeBrons level is a moron. LeBron is top 10(maybe top 5) and will only increase as his career continues. Kobe isn't in the conversation. He should be compared to Wade as they are in the same tier.[/B

No one was talking about Lebron you ****ing lunatic

[DMAVS41]

You don't think its odd that your list based on "level of play" disregarding championships and longevity is pretty much in line with the consensus top 12 of all time including championships and longevity.

:confusedshrug:

What does "level of play" mean exactly?

Not odd at all. Of the top 10 players of all time...Kobe is the only I question deserves to be there on level of play alone. Level of play means how good a player is independent of team strength. Essentially just how impactful or good a basketball player is.

So how is that odd?

[KG215]

lol @ rings. Horry has 7.

Kobe has 2 Finals MVPs and 1 of them is *(asteriked) because Pau Gasol should have got it in 2010. LeBron already has matched him at age 28.

Kobes other 3 titles are coattail titles he got from playing with the MDE Prime Shaq. You give LeBron prime Shaq for 3 random years from 2005-2011 and he wins the title all of those years too. Not to mention Kobe had him for 8 years.

Anyone that thinks Kobe is on LeBrons level is a moron. LeBron is top 10(maybe top 5) and will only increase as his career continues. Kobe isn't in the conversation. He should be compared to Wade as they are in the same tier.
You really are as insecure as it gets. No one was talking about LeBron, and you come in here spewing your bullshit, trying to shove your agenda down everyone's throat.

And no, Kobe deserved the 2010 Finals MVP, so get out of here with that nonsense.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Not odd at all. Of the top 10 players of all time...Kobe is the only I question deserves to be there on level of play alone. Level of play means how good a player is independent of team strength. Essentially just how impactful or good a basketball player is.

So how is that odd?

Its not odd that you doubt Kobe. Its odd that all of the rest are exactly the same. Longevity and rings apparently has zero impact on the rest of your rankings. Couldn't even throw KG or Malone a bone or drop down Russell. It shows no actual thought behind it.

[MisterAmazing]

Still not better than LeBron.


It would look worse than LeBrons, so the same

We've been waiting for you guys, come on, the fight's about to start!

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=307358

[DMAVS41]

Its not odd that you doubt Kobe. Its odd that all of the rest are exactly the same. Longevity and rings apparently has zero impact on the rest of your rankings. Couldn't even throw KG or Malone a bone or drop down Russell. It shows no actual thought behind it.

it wasn't in order...and I definitely don't think Malone deserves to be there without longevity. throw in longevity and remove rings? then maybe Malone might be up there.

it's not odd at all.

[PickernRoller]

Its not odd that you doubt Kobe. Its odd that all of the rest are exactly the same. Longevity and rings apparently has zero impact on the rest of your rankings. Couldn't even throw KG or Malone a bone or drop down Russell. It shows no actual thought behind it.

There is no actual thought behind Gino's agenda which is based on hate. As much as he might try to deceive. But you and I know that. I sometimes wonder if posters here forget their past history everytime they make a new post. Gino is a fine example.

[TonyMontana]

No one was talking about Lebron you ****ing lunatic

http://static6.businessinsider.com/image/51c3d72569bedd5b5300000d-800-/lebron-james-trophies-nba-finals-2013.jpg


You really are as insecure as it gets. No one was talking about LeBron, and you come in here spewing your bullshit, trying to shove your agenda down everyone's throat.

And no, Kobe deserved the 2010 Finals MVP, so get out of here with that nonsense.

Pau Gasol was the top player on the 2010 Lakers and the MVP of the team.

Each game of the series vs the Celtics, the team that won the rebounding battle won the series. Pau Gasol was the top rebounder in the series and dominated Bostons top player, KG one of the best rebounders ever. Pau Gasol was anchoring the paint for LA and being the top interior player in a series that was won down low.

Kobe shot terrible percentages capped off by the legendary 6/24 Game 7. And the Lakers still won despite him shooting like that. Kobes 40% shooting is the lowest of any player ever to win the award and its proof that he won it based on name recognition alone. Gasols 48% was by far the best on the team of meaningful players.

Gasol also did a tremendous job when the Lakers went to him. Very low turnovers, and had just as many assists as Bryant who had WAY more touches(and turnovers).

Win shares also backs up Gasol who had 4.3 WS(.224/48) over Kobe 3.6 WS(.190/48).

[PickernRoller]

Tony going wild....next up. Striptease for Lebron.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Way too many variables. For example, how does Kobe develop early on if he's on a bad team? Is he still coached by Phil? If not, how does that affect his development?

[Magic 32]

Each game of the series vs the Celtics, the team that won the rebounding battle won the series.


Pau averaged 3.5 more rebounds than Kobe.

:bowdown:



Kobe shot terrible percentages capped off by the legendary 6/24 Game 7. And the Lakers still won despite him shooting like that. Kobes 40% shooting is the lowest of any player ever to win the award and its proof that he won it based on name recognition alone.


MWP won game 7. Anyway...



Kobe shot 43.5% through 6 games (40.8% total).

Lebron shot 42.8% through 6 games against the Spurs. (44.1% total)

Kobe had 4 games of +.450%

Lebron had 2 games of +.450%

And Kobe didn't mercilessly stat-pad in one of the games.

Take away those 4 shots at the end of game 4, and Lebron would have shot 43% (2.2% better than Kobe).



Gasols 48% was by far the best on the team of meaningful players.


Kobe shot 4.8% lower than his season average.

Pau shot..............4.8% lower than his season average.

and 48.8% is not very good for a center.



And finally, Kobe didn't sta-pad in garbage time like Pau.

Look at game 1 for some education.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-BB61bes6A&t=2m9s

[Lebron23]

Get Kobe's dick out of your mouth. The guy demanded to be traded to the Lakers after he was drafted by the Hornets.

Kobe with the Hornets = zero championship.

[Magic 32]

Get Kobe's dick out of your mouth. The guy demanded to be traded to the Lakers after he was drafted by the Hornets.

Kobe with the Hornets = zero championship.

Yes, the 13th pick of the draft can demand where he want to go:facepalm

It's got nothing to do with Jerry West falling in love with him ....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5J78OKgsyP8&t=2m47s

[Unbiased_one]

If he had a top 5 roster with his true prime (03-09 postseason, 7 full seasons) every single season, he would of won a ring almost every single year. At least 5 rings more likely 6, 7 a possibility.


That is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read.

[Mr Exlax]

1996-2002 = The number 1 guy on a crappy team.

2003-2009 = The number 1 guy on a contending "top 5'ish" team.

2010-2013 = On a contending team as a second/third option.

???

The only way his legacy looks better to me if he was able to do more with the teams he had before they got Pau Gasol. My only knock on Kobe is his leadership ability. That ability to maximize the talent around you. Make anybody on the court a threat. Give your guys confidence. Other than that though, can't ask for anything else.

[Magic 32]

The only way his legacy looks better to me if he was able to do more with the teams he had before they got Pau Gasol. My only knock on Kobe is his leadership ability. That ability to maximize the talent around you. Make anybody on the court a threat. Give your guys confidence. Other than that though, can't ask for anything else.

I don't think Smush could play much better.

[Mr Exlax]

I don't think Smush could play much better.

It's soley my opinion of course. I think Kobe could have gotten more out of that roster full of misfits. That's my only knock on the guy. Just that he isn't a great leader. Could never fully maximize the talent around him or raise the level of talent around him. That's my only thing. As far as "legacy" though, I'm gathering people only look at rings, but me myself I NEVER look at rings. FMVPs maybe, but championship rings nah.

[STATUTORY]

It's soley my opinion of course. I think Kobe could have gotten more out of that roster full of misfits. That's my only knock on the guy. Just that he isn't a great leader. Could never fully maximize the talent around him or raise the level of talent around him. That's my only thing. As far as "legacy" though, I'm gathering people only look at rings, but me myself I NEVER look at rings. FMVPs maybe, but championship rings nah.

he got a bunch of CBA level talent to the nba playoffs game 7 in the western conference and that's not enough?

Why do you use words like misfit when Chris Mihm, Smush Parker, Luke Walton, deveaon george, brian cook are flat out scrubs?

[Mr Exlax]

he got a bunch of CBA level talent to the nba playoffs game 7 in the western conference and that's not enough?

Why do you use words like misfit when Chris Mihm, Smush Parker, Luke Walton, deveaon george, brian cook are flat out scrubs?

Honestly, it's not enough for me. This was when they were up 3-1 right? I'm ok with a team's best player taking over when needed, but he tried/tries to play hero ball from the opening tip. His unwillingness to pass at times is what I'm talking about. That intangible he lacks where his teammates want to play harder for him or where he builds up their confidence. Kobe's probably physically the most skilled basketball player of all time. It's the mental skills that he lacks IMO.

I've seen other players get the most out of players that I consider misfits / scrubs as well. It's just the sign of a leader to me.

Again though, his "legacy" to me would only look better if he had ever added that into his skillset. If you only go by rings and etc, I'd say it would look better if he had gotten maybe one FMVP while playing with Shaq. That would be really saying something. Other than that though nah.

[Magic 32]

Honestly, it's not enough for me. This was when they were up 3-1 right? I'm ok with a team's best player taking over when needed, but he tried/tries to play hero ball from the opening tip. His unwillingness to pass at times is what I'm talking about. That intangible he lacks where his teammates want to play harder for him or where he builds up their confidence. Kobe's probably physically the most skilled basketball player of all time. It's the mental skills that he lacks IMO.

I've seen other players get the most out of players that I consider misfits / scrubs as well. It's just the sign of a leader to me.

Again though, his "legacy" to me would only look better if he had ever added that into his skillset. If you only go by rings and etc, I'd say it would look better if he had gotten maybe one FMVP while playing with Shaq. That would be really saying something. Other than that though nah.

Lebron immediately lost to good teams when he played in Cleveland.

The Suns were 54 & 61 win teams in 06 and 07.

Lebron was 2-5 against +44 win teams in Cleveland (Hawks 09, Pistons 07), and 1-5 against 50+ teams.

[Fresh Kid]

Get Kobe's dick out of your mouth. The guy demanded to be traded to the Lakers after he was drafted by the Hornets.

Kobe with the Hornets = zero championship.
Says the guy who's username is lebron23. O brother. Plus Kobe didnt demand a trade on draft night 1996.

[KOBE143]

GOAT

Top 2 all time at worst

:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

[Mr Exlax]

Lebron immediately lost to good teams when he played in Cleveland.

The Suns were 54 & 61 win team in 06 and 07.

Lebron was 2-5 against +44 win teams in Cleveland (Hawks 09, Pistons 07), and 1-5 against 50+ teams.

I can't remember if I thought LA would win or not, but it's not really that they lost. There's really not too much more he could do if i remember correctly. It's just what I saw from the rest of the players over the span of his career after Shaq. I can't quite explain it. LeBron made his scrubs threats. Made some of them look like stars. That's leadership to me. I just wanted to see an ounce of that out of Kobe. That's my only real knock on his career.

[Magic 32]

I can't remember if I thought LA would win or not, but it's not really that they lost. There's really not too much more he could do if i remember correctly. It's just what I saw from the rest of the players over the span of his career after Shaq. I can't quite explain it. LeBron made his scrubs threats. Made some of them look like stars. That's leadership to me. I just wanted to see an ounce of that out of Kobe. That's my only real knock on his career.

Made them feel like stars maybe, but they still lost.

It's seems like this is one of those "Lebron is from the hood and takes care of his friends" vs "Kobe the loner from Italy who just wants to win".

That's Nelly's problem. Unfollowing Howard on twitter :banghead:

[Jacks3]

120 career 40+ pt games (3rd all-time)
25 career 50+ pt games (3rd all-time)
5 career 60+ pt games (2nd all-time)


This despite playing with Shaq for 8 seasons and only having 8 seasons as the clear #1 option (and he wasn't even in his prime for 4 of those seasons).

Amazing!

Just imagine what he could have done had he had his own team from the beginning.

I'd say...

180-200 40+ pt games.
40+ 50+ pt games.
10-12 60+ pt games.
Career averages of around 31/6/5/2/56% TS.

:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

[DMAVS41]

120 career 40+ pt games (3rd all-time)
25 career 50+ pt games (3rd all-time)
5 career 60+ pt games (2nd all-time)


This despite playing with Shaq for 8 seasons and only having 8 seasons as the clear #1 option (and he wasn't even in his prime for 4 of those seasons).

Amazing!

Just imagine what he could have done had he had his own team from the beginning.

I'd say...

180-200 40+ pt games.
40+ 50+ pt games.
10-12 60+ pt games.
Career averages of around 31/6/5/2/56% TS.

:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:


There is no way in hell Kobe could have averaged 31 ppg at 56% TS for his career. He's at 25.5 and 55.5% TS for his career and that is with playing limited minutes early on and having the benefit of Shaq for 8 years of his career.

[Jacks3]

120 career 40+ pt games (3rd all-time)
25 career 50+ pt games (3rd all-time)
5 career 60+ pt games (2nd all-time)


This despite playing with Shaq for 8 seasons and only having 8 seasons as the clear #1 option (and he wasn't even in his prime for 4 of those seasons).

Amazing!

Just imagine what he could have done had he had his own team from the beginning.

I'd say...

180-200 40+ pt games.
40+ 50+ pt games.
10-12 60+ pt games.
Career averages of around 31/6/5/2/56% TS.

:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:
Look at what he did when he finally got healthy with his OWN team:

2005-2007;
34 PPG/6 RPG/5 APG/2 SPG/57% TS/27 PER/115 ORTG
45 40+ pt games (2X more than anybody in the league during this stretch)
18 50+ pt games (6X more than anybody in the league during this stretch) including 10 in one freaking season, which nobody in history other than Wilt has done.
5 60+ pt games (rest of the league had 1 combined LOL).

Incredible. Amazing. Sadly, he could have been doing this shit since the beginning of his prime (2001).

Damn shame.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Why do people both arguing with DMAVS? His agenda constantly changes depending on the topic.

[guy]

120 career 40+ pt games (3rd all-time)
25 career 50+ pt games (3rd all-time)
5 career 60+ pt games (2nd all-time)


This despite playing with Shaq for 8 seasons and only having 8 seasons as the clear #1 option (and he wasn't even in his prime for 4 of those seasons).

Amazing!

Just imagine what he could have done had he had his own team from the beginning.

I'd say...

180-200 40+ pt games.
40+ 50+ pt games.
10-12 60+ pt games.
Career averages of around 31/6/5/2/56% TS.

:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

Are you just assuming Kobe would be playing on a shitty team his whole career? Because his numbers playing with Shaq, starting from 2000 when he became a star player, aren't much different then his numbers starting from 08 when he was playing with Gasol and its highly doubtful he would be playing on a shitty team for his whole career.

[DMAVS41]

Why do people both arguing with DMAVS? His agenda constantly changes depending on the topic.

That is actually called not having an agenda.

[Jacks3]

He only had two prime years with Pau (08,09). Younger Kobe would have put up the numbers and won ala 2008. You could potentially be looking at multiple MVP's, 3-4 rings as the man instead of only 2, career numbers of around 30-31/6/5/2/56% TS, more scoring titles, much more 40+/50+/60+ pt games, better career post-season numbers, etc.


Yeah, playing with Shaq defiantly hurt his career.

The luckiest stars are guys like Durant and Rose. Guys who have great supporting casts from the very beginning and can put up the numbers.

Imagine a 2001 Kobe with a supporting cast like the 2011 Bulls. He'd be guaranteed amazing numbers and contention for the next decade.

All as the career #1 guy.

That would have been literally the perfect fit.

[STATUTORY]

There is no way in hell Kobe could have averaged 31 ppg at 56% TS for his career. He's at 25.5 and 55.5% TS for his career and that is with playing limited minutes early on and having the benefit of Shaq for 8 years of his career.

kobe increases his efficiency or at least maintains it even as he increased the shot attempts necessary for 31pts. Different players have different threshold where they experience diminishing returns to marginal shot attempt, that bar is higher for kobe than it is for others. That's what people really mean when they mean "volume" shooter

[DMAVS41]

kobe increases his efficiency or at least maintains it even as he increased the shot attempts necessary for 31pts. Different players have different threshold where they experience diminishing returns to marginal shot attempt, that bar is higher for kobe than it is for others. That's what people really mean when they mean "volume" shooter

Forget that...it's about him having to score a ton more his first 4 years in the league...which just wasn't possible unless he was taking an absurd amount of shots.

Do you realize how much more he'd have to score on his career to average 5.5 more points per game? And somehow his efficiency is going to go up .5% overall with that? It's absurd.

[branslowski]

DMavs41-"Oh snap!, Kobe thread, we in there like swimwear!! (scrolls through thread searching for a positive Kobe comment) AHH, nope, Kobe isn't good at this because blah blah blah! (You own him on his agenda orientated point, he jumps the topic and grabs hold of another point that has nothing to do with what he was originally arguing).

Leading to A+ Thread, 10+ pages!:lol

[DMAVS41]

DMavs41-"Oh snap!, Kobe thread, we in there like swimwear!! (scrolls through thread searching for a positive Kobe comment) AHH, nope, Kobe isn't good at this because blah blah blah! (You own him on his agenda orientated point, he jumps the topic and grabs hold of another point that has nothing to do with what he was originally arguing).

Leading to A+ Thread, 10+ pages!:lol

I say plenty of positive things.

Do you really think Kobe could have averaged 31 ppg on higher efficiency than he has for his career?

Please explain to me how he's going to average 5.5 more ppg for his career and also shoot better overall in the process.

But nah...I should just come on here and praise Kobe when comments like that are made.

[branslowski]

Look at what he did when he finally got healthy with his OWN team:

2005-2007;
34 PPG/6 RPG/5 APG/2 SPG/57% TS/27 PER/115 ORTG
45 40+ pt games (2X more than anybody in the league during this stretch)
18 50+ pt games (6X more than anybody in the league during this stretch) including 10 in one freaking season, which nobody in history other than Wilt has done.
5 60+ pt games (rest of the league had 1 combined LOL).

Incredible. Amazing. Sadly, he could have been doing this shit since the beginning of his prime (2001).

Damn shame.

Didn't know this, good post. Saved for truth.:applause:

The funniest part is ppl still denying that he could put up these numbers with a team of his own even wen they look at these facts above posted.:facepalm

[Mr Exlax]

Made them feel like stars maybe, but they still lost.

It's seems like this is one of those "Lebron is from the hood and takes care of his friends" vs "Kobe the loner from Italy who just wants to win".

That's Nelly's problem. Unfollowing Howard on twitter :banghead:

Nah my opinion isn't really based on anything like that. This is something I think that it takes to win. Both these players obviously have the drive and determination to be championship caliber players. It's just an intangible that I look for when I judge players. Again though, I'm not even really concerned about the wins or losses aspect of it. Both lost to better overall teams. Both were still the best two players on the court. Can't take that away from them. It's more than just a series though. I'm looking at regular season games and playoff games. I barely made it through Nelly and First Take's debate cause it sucked ass, but I do agree with Nelly saying that nobody worth mentioning wants to play with Kobe. It's that intangible I keep talking about. It's ok with being the alpha dog. What I'm not ok with is being the alpha dog and not getting the most that you can out of your teammates.

[Magic 32]

Nah my opinion isn't really based on anything like that. This is something I think that it takes to win. Both these players obviously have the drive and determination to be championship caliber players. It's just an intangible that I look for when I judge players. Again though, I'm not even really concerned about the wins or losses aspect of it. Both lost to better overall teams. Both were still the best two players on the court. Can't take that away from them. It's more than just a series though. I'm looking at regular season games and playoff games. I barely made it through Nelly and First Take's debate cause it sucked ass, but I do agree with Nelly saying that nobody worth mentioning wants to play with Kobe. It's that intangible I keep talking about. It's ok with being the alpha dog. What I'm not ok with is being the alpha dog and not getting the most that you can out of your teammates.

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/07/17/paul-george-says-it-would-be-tough-to-say-no-to-kobe-but-hes-happy-with-the-pacers/

Again, he did get everything out of his teammates. Where is Ariza, Walton, Odom, The Machine, Farmar, Powell, Brown today?

[branslowski]

I say plenty of positive things.

Do you really think Kobe could have averaged 31 ppg on higher efficiency than he has for his career?

Please explain to me how he's going to average 5.5 more ppg for his career and also shoot better overall in the process.

But nah...I should just come on here and praise Kobe when comments like that are made.

Bro, I was jokin wit you, I actually like you as a poster. :lol

As for the question, If he played with his own Team and they didn't have another offensive threat, yes his career ppg would be higher...Just look at the sample evidence Jacks posted. At the sametime though, I doubt he would have 5 rings.

[riseagainst]

How long did it take LeBron to win a ring..lol

:lol
dat ether.

[DMAVS41]

Bro, I was jokin wit you, I actually like you as a poster. :lol

As for the question, If he played with his own Team and they didn't have another offensive threat, yes his career ppg would be higher...Just look at the sample evidence Jacks posted. At the sametime though, I doubt he would have 5 rings.

Of course his career ppg would be higher. I've said this repeatedly. I don't think 31 ppg is possible unless he was on very poor teams throughout his entire career, but lets say it is.

My point is that there is no way for him to average 5.5 more ppg for his career and also see an increase in his TS% for his career.

He's at 25.5 ppg at 55.5% TS for his career right now.

Jacks claimed he would be at 31 ppg at 56% TS for his career in his hypothetical.

The efficiency is what is just not plausible. 31 ppg is a huge stretch, but certainly possible...but how on earth is Kobe going to so a bump in efficiency while having to score a lot more points throughout his career? Also...he would have had to score quite a bit more early on...and not only was he a much worse player over his first 4 or so years...defenses were better back then as well.

[Mr Exlax]

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/07/17/paul-george-says-it-would-be-tough-to-say-no-to-kobe-but-hes-happy-with-the-pacers/

Again, he did get everything out of his teammates. Where is Ariza, Walton, Odom, The Machine, Farmar, Powell, Brown today?

What else was PG supposed to say though? He followed it up by saying something about playing at home. That's what he ended it with.

I think like half of those guys are still in the NBA right? Kobe had an advantage over just about any team in the NBA because of those 2 seven footers in Bynum and Gasol, yet refused to play inside outside. It's just stuff like that. Not saying either one of those guys was better than the Bean, but I feel like he should've did a better job with utilizing them. The advantage that either one of those guys had over their defenders was greater than the advantage Kobe had over his IMO. Follow me?

[Magic 32]

What else was PG supposed to say though? He followed it up by saying something about playing at home. That's what he ended it with.

I think like half of those guys are still in the NBA right? Kobe had an advantage over just about any team in the NBA because of those 2 seven footers in Bynum and Gasol, yet refused to play inside outside. It's just stuff like that. Not saying either one of those guys was better than the Bean, but I feel like he should've did a better job with utilizing them. The advantage that either one of those guys had over their defenders was greater than the advantage Kobe had over his IMO. Follow me?

They won.

And please don't mention Bynum. He was only a factor in 2012.

[Mr Exlax]

They won.

And please don't mention Bynum. He was only a factor in 2012.

LOL 2012 is the one I'm talking about the most! Even then though, they won, but I don't feel like he was a great leader. Again, I don't really measure a player by wins and losses. There's sooooooooo much that goes into that than just the player.

[Heavincent]

The advantage that either one of those guys had over their defenders was greater than the advantage Kobe had over his IMO.

No.

[Magic 32]

LOL 2012 is the one I'm talking about the most! Even then though, they won, but I don't feel like he was a great leader. Again, I don't really measure a player by wins and losses. There's sooooooooo much that goes into that than just the player.

Kobe was 33 years old. That's strange time to measure him as a career leader.

And if you don't use winning as a measure, was Jordan a poor leader too?

[guy]

He only had two prime years with Pau (08,09). Younger Kobe would have put up the numbers and won ala 2008. You could potentially be looking at multiple MVP's, 3-4 rings as the man instead of only 2, career numbers of around 30-31/6/5/2/56% TS, more scoring titles, much more 40+/50+/60+ pt games, better career post-season numbers, etc.


Yeah, playing with Shaq defiantly hurt his career.

The luckiest stars are guys like Durant and Rose. Guys who have great supporting casts from the very beginning and can put up the numbers.

Imagine a 2001 Kobe with a supporting cast like the 2011 Bulls. He'd be guaranteed amazing numbers and contention for the next decade.

All as the career #1 guy.

That would have been literally the perfect fit.

I would consider 2010 still his prime. He wasn't in his prime for the majority of his career with Shaq. What's your point?

You really brought up Durant? Kobe isn't putting up that much better numbers, if better numbers at all, playing with Westbrook.

[Mr Exlax]

Kobe was 33 years old. That's strange time to measure him as a career leader.

And if you don't use winning as a measure, was Jordan a poor leader as well?

It's been the same his entire career though bro. He sucks as a leader. He sucks as a leader back then. He sucks as a leader right now. He doesn't suck a basketball. Follow me?

Jordan started off as a very poor leader from what I was told. I don't knock him for demanding more help after some of those losses in the playoffs early on in his career. He couldn't get more out of what he had. Even if he would've had them wanting to win for him, they would still lose because they were losing to better teams, but he was still by far, the best player on the court before the Bulls won the first championship. He started to trust his teammates more and that contributed to them winning. I guess later on he might've gotten better, but that's hard for me to say when you have Pip, Harper, Rodman, Kukoc, Grant etc who were all good in their own right. Overall as a leader though, probably not. Probably not that good. When you have to resort to punching a teammate for the sole reason of lighting you up in practice one day, that's not becoming of a great leader IMO.

[Magic 32]

It's been the same his entire career though bro. He sucks as a leader. He sucks as a leader back then. He sucks as a leader right now. He doesn't suck a basketball. Follow me?


If you say so :rolleyes:

[guy]

The efficiency is what is just not plausible. 31 ppg is a huge stretch, but certainly possible..

Certainly possible? Its nearly impossible if we're talking about the reason being solely cause of Shaq. For Kobe to have averaged 31 ppg, he would be at over 38K points right now, which is nearly 7K more then what he currently has. If we were to expect that to all occur during his first 8 years when he played with Shaq, then for those 8 years he would've averaged about 34 ppg, which is 12 more ppg then what he actually averaged, about 22 ppg. Does anyone honestly think that would happen? This is what his ppg would look like from 97-04 if we just added 12 ppg to each season:

97 - 20 ppg
98 - 27 ppg
99 - 32 ppg
00 - 35 ppg
01 - 41 ppg
02 - 37 ppg
03 - 42 ppg
04 - 36 ppg

Does anyone honestly think that Shaq cost him those kind of stats? I'm not even going to bother touching the efficiency part which would obviously go down significantly if he were taking that many shots.

[Mr Exlax]

If you say so :rolleyes:

No no no my man. My bad. With me, you NEVER ever ever need to tell me, "If you say so" or anything like that. That's why I try to make it a point in every opinion that I have that I say IMO. I'm not saying it's absolute fact and a proven point etc. It's my opinion. I imagine, in your opinion, Kobe is for sure a great and one of the greatest leaders ever. I would simply reply with I don't agree with that opinion. I can't ever ever ever really say that somebody's opinion is "wrong" or "incorrect".

[DMAVS41]

Certainly possible? Its nearly impossible if we're talking about the reason being solely cause of Shaq. For Kobe to have averaged 31 ppg, he would be at over 38K points right now, which is nearly 7K more then what he currently has. If we were to expect that to all occur during his first 8 years when he played with Shaq, then for those 8 years he would've averaged about 34 ppg, which is 12 more ppg then what he actually averaged, about 22 ppg. Does anyone honestly think that would happen? This is what his ppg would look like from 97-04 if we just added 12 ppg to each season:

97 - 20 ppg
98 - 27 ppg
99 - 32 ppg
00 - 35 ppg
01 - 41 ppg
02 - 37 ppg
03 - 42 ppg
04 - 36 ppg

Does anyone honestly think that Shaq cost him those kind of stats? I'm not even going to bother touching the efficiency part which would obviously go down significantly if he were taking that many shots.

Exactly why I said it was a huge stretch. But it is possible in the sense that if Kobe had played on terrible teams his first 8 years he could have just been the most selfish player of all time (which I believe deep down he is...he just happens to also want to win) and taken 30 shots a game. I could at least envision a universe in which Kobe takes 30 shots a game for an 8 year stretch on terrible teams.

I can't envision any reality in which Kobe does that and also increases his career TS%. That to me is impossible.

[guy]

Exactly why I said it was a huge stretch. But it is possible in the sense that if Kobe had played on terrible teams his first 8 years he could have just been the most selfish player of all time (which I believe deep down he is...he just happens to also want to win) and taken 30 shots a game. I could at least envision a universe in which Kobe takes 30 shots a game for an 8 year stretch on terrible teams.

I can't envision any reality in which Kobe does that and also increases his career TS%. That to me is impossible.

Right. I just don't see that great of a player playing on bad teams for that long. It would be really hard for management to not put at least decent pieces around that great of a player. For him to put up those numbers, his teams would probably have to be even worse then what he had in 06 and 07.

[DMAVS41]

Right. I just don't see that great of a player playing on bad teams for that long. It would be really hard for management to not put at least decent pieces around that great of a player. For him to put up those numbers, his teams would probably have to be even worse then what he had in 06 and 07.

totally agree. but at least possible in the sense that a young ego maniac out of high school like kobe joining a terrible team without shaq or phil jackson...etc. I could just see the wheels coming off for quite a while if he played for a franchise like the bobcats or something and really can envision a long stretch in which he shoots 27 to 32 times a game.

[guy]

totally agree. but at least possible in the sense that a young ego maniac out of high school like kobe joining a terrible team without shaq or phil jackson...etc. I could just see the wheels coming off for quite a while if he played for a franchise like the bobcats or something and really can envision a long stretch in which he shoots 27 to 32 times a game.

Yes. Its just funny that when people talk about "if Kobe never played with Shaq", they assume it would've been the absolute worst scenario team-wise possible when it comes to his stats i.e. he'd be taking 30 shots a game. Fact is Kobe took a lot of shots playing with Shaq anyway and he was clearly and by far the team's #2 for the majority of that time, so had he been #1, his attempts wouldn't necessarily go up that much as was the case when he started playing with Gasol.

[Lakers2877]

I don't think Kobes career can be much better. Not saying he's a top 5 player of all time but his resume is probably top 5

[Fresh Kid]

That is actually called not having an agenda.
Ethered.

[DMAVS41]

Yes. Its just funny that when people talk about "if Kobe never played with Shaq", they assume it would've been the absolute worst scenario team-wise possible when it comes to his stats i.e. he'd be taking 30 shots a game. Fact is Kobe took a lot of shots playing with Shaq anyway and he was clearly and by far the team's #2 for the majority of that time, so had he been #1, his attempts wouldn't necessarily go up that much as was the case when he started playing with Gasol.

totally agree.

[DMAVS41]

Ethered.

One of my better responses if I must say so myself.

:cheers:

[Lakers2877]

Yes. Its just funny that when people talk about "if Kobe never played with Shaq", they assume it would've been the absolute worst scenario team-wise possible when it comes to his stats i.e. he'd be taking 30 shots a game. Fact is Kobe took a lot of shots playing with Shaq anyway and he was clearly and by far the team's #2 for the majority of that time, so had he been #1, his attempts wouldn't necessarily go up that much as was the case when he started playing with Gasol.
I can only imagine what his numbers would look like if he played on a shit team and played in the East. He wouldn't have the winning but he'd probably ave 32-35 a game

[guy]

I can only imagine what his numbers would look like if he played on a shit team and played in the East. He wouldn't have the winning but he'd probably ave 32-35 a game

Do the math and then you'd realize how incredibly far fetched that is.

[SamuraiSWISH]

I think Kobe's career would've been viewed differently and far greater if while he was second option for the Lakers during Shaq's reign he would've focused on making plays, dishing the rock, playing defense and essentially being a more athletic, defensive capable version of Magic (the guy he claims was his favorite) because at no point was he going to be the better, more consistent and efficient offensive weapon compared to Shaq. If he would've put up 20 ppg and near 10 apg while being first team all defense ... Still being the Lakers closer in the 4th but not alienating teammates with hogging the ball and pissing Shaq off his rep would've been much better.

And then when Shaq left he could be the alpha 28 / 5 / 5 guy he was in his prime and he would've proved he could've been an elite selfless play maker and an elite scorer all while winning rings as either the set up guy who put the team first and respected his elders (Shaq) and also proved he could do it as a high volume scoring alpha dog akin to Jordan.

That should've been IMO how his career played out ideally. Few would give him the shit they do now if it played out like that.