IS Kobe Bryant a top 10 player of all-time?

[Electric Slide]

Discuss.

[crisoner]

Wow what an Original topic

[CanYouDigIt]

5 Starred

Bookmarked

Will show my grandchildren

[TonyMontana]

Nope, and its not even close.

Funny when people put him on par with guys like LeBron, Shaq, Duncan.

Whos going to build a franchise around Kobe over one of them provided there is an equal supporting cast?

Forget these guys, most rational basketball people would build around Patrick Ewing over Kobe.

If you look at guys most people consider top 10 all-time they are extremely dominant in all facets of the game and are EFFICIENT. I think Bill Russell is the only other people put in the top 10 thats career shooting percentage is below 50%. And thats because he is highly regarded for DEFENSE AND REBOUNDING.

Kobes main attribute is scoring the basketball and his career high is still around 46.8%. Career is 45%. Compare that to the real greats, and you realize just how outclassed he is.

[Jameerthefear]

Yes. Mods lock thread plz

[LosScandalous]

yes

[WayOfWade]

I'm inclined to say yes.

[CanYouDigIt]

But on topic:

Michael Jordon
Magic Johnson
Wilt Chamberlain
Bill Russell
Larry Bird
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
(no order)

Are above Kobe Bryant, so Kobe is #7 for me, and he'll likely stay there unless someone surpasses him.

[JimmyMcAdocious]

Kobe is not above Duncan. Get the **** out.

[Fresh Kid]

:biggums: :wtf: :kobe:

[Fresh Kid]

Kobe is not above Duncan. Get the **** out.
http://static1.businessinsider.com/image/5016d81aecad04ef51000015-400-/kobe-bryant-usa-basketball-2012-london-olympics.jpg

[Fresh Kid]

But on topic:


Magic Johnson

Larry Bird

(no order)

Are above Kobe Bryant, so Kobe is #7 for me, and he'll likely stay there unless someone surpasses him.
http://www4.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Kobe+Bryant+Olympics+Day+15+Basketball+HSK7r46Euty l.jpg

[SilkkTheShocker]

Even current Duncan has a bigger impact than prime Kobe ever did. :confusedshrug:

[fpliii]

willds - What's your top 15? I don't do them anymore, but I'm interested in seeing your list.

[Trollsmasher]

Kobe is 11th.

Accept is as a fact and move on.

[Wavves]

I'd say yes, but I don't see how it's completely absurd to not have him in your top 10. Even most Lebron stans who don't think so would still put him between 10-15 or so. That's not too crazy or wrong in my opinion seeing as a top 10 list is completly your own opinion.

[Deuce Bigalow]

I'd like to see someone prove that he isn't.

His resume speaks for itself
[quote]5

[Fresh Kid]

willds - What's your top 15? I don't do them anymore, but I'm interested in seeing your list.
I will have to get back to you on that, I really have to sort tha names out.

[Fresh Kid]

Even current Duncan has a bigger impact than prime Kobe ever did. :confusedshrug:
http://mediaoutrage.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/LebronKobe2.jpg

[bdreason]

I have him at #10, but LeBron takes his spot (and maybe more) if he wins another chip.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Nope, and its not even close.

Funny when people put him on par with guys like LeBron, Shaq, Duncan.

Whos going to build a franchise around Kobe over one of them provided there is an equal supporting cast?

Forget these guys, most rational basketball people would build around Patrick Ewing over Kobe.

If you look at guys most people consider top 10 all-time they are extremely dominant in all facets of the game and are EFFICIENT. I think Bill Russell is the only other people put in the top 10 thats career shooting percentage is below 50%. And thats because he is highly regarded for DEFENSE AND REBOUNDING.

Kobes main attribute is scoring the basketball and his career high is still around 46.8%. Career is 45%. Compare that to the real greats, and you realize just how outclassed he is.
Kobe's Career TS% = 55.5
Hakeem's Career TS% = 55.3
Duncan's Career TS% = 55.2
Wilt's Career TS% = 54.7
Russell's Career TS% = 47.1

Next clown

[Mr. Jabbar]

If by top 10 you mean top 5 then we have a decent thread

[Haks]

1.MJ
2.Kareem
3.Magic
4.Russell
5.Bird
6.Wilt
7.Shaq
8.Kobe
9.Hakeem
10.Lebron

[bdreason]

Kobe's Career TS% = 55.5
Hakeem's Career TS% = 55.3
Duncan's Career TS% = 55.2
Wilt's Career TS% = 54.7
Russell's Career TS% = 47.1

Next clown


Did you really just compare Kobe to 5 of the greatest defensive bigs in the history of the game?

Kobe fans should be grateful that his accolades allow him to be ranked so high, because his overall impact on the game doesn't approach the aforementioned players.

[TonyMontana]

Kobe's Career TS% = 55.5
Hakeem's Career TS% = 55.3
Duncan's Career TS% = 55.2
Wilt's Career TS% = 54.7
Russell's Career TS% = 47.1

Next clown

How do these numbers prove what I said was wrong? You chose an entirely different statistic as your rebuttal. :oldlol:

Jordan Career FG%: 49.7%
Bird Career FG%: 49.7%
Magic Career FG%: 52.0%
LeBron Career FG%: 49.0%
Duncan Career FG%: 50.7%
Wilt Career FG%: 54.0%
Hakeem Career FG%: 51.2%
Kareem Career FG%: 55.9%
Shaq Career FG%: 58.2%
Kobe Career FG%: 45.4%

One of these things is not like the others,
One of these things just doesn't belong,
Can you tell which thing is not like the others?


Did you really just compare Kobe to 5 of the greatest defensive bigs in the history of the game?

Kobe fans should be grateful that his accolades allow him to be ranked so high, because his overall impact on the game doesn't approach the aforementioned players.

:oldlol: :applause:

[Deuce Bigalow]

How do these numbers prove what I said was wrong? You chose an entirely different statistic as your rebuttal. :oldlol:

Jordan Career FG%: 49.7%
Bird Career FG%: 49.7%
Magic Career FG%: 52.0%
LeBron Career FG%: 49.0%
Duncan Career FG%: 50.7%
Wilt Career FG%: 54.0%
Hakeem Career FG%: 51.2%
Kareem Career FG%: 55.9%
Shaq Career FG%: 58.2%
Kobe Career FG%: 45.4%

One of these things is not like the others,
One of these things just doesn't belong,
Can you tell which thing is not like the others?



:oldlol: :applause:
Let's just disregard 3-pointers and free-throws. Those don't matter.

[Unbiased_one]

Kobe's Career TS% = 55.5
Hakeem's Career TS% = 55.3
Duncan's Career TS% = 55.2
Wilt's Career TS% = 54.7
Russell's Career TS% = 47.1

Next clown

Except kobe, all were bad ft shooters...ppp is what you should look at, or offensive rating.

But op...for me the answer is yes, although I think lebron for sure and quite possibly Durant will move above him by the ends of their careers, so he will drop to 11 or 12 soon.

[Haks]

Why do people dislike the use of TS%?

[Haks]

Did you really just compare Kobe to 5 of the greatest defensive bigs in the history of the game?

Kobe fans should be grateful that his accolades allow him to be ranked so high, because his overall impact on the game doesn't approach the aforementioned players.
If you actually read what he wrote he just proved that Kobe isnt as inefficient as you guys believe he is

[TonyMontana]

New question for the Kobe stans

Which other modern players(1980-present) has a FG% as low as Kobes(45.4%), yet is still regarded as an all-time great?

Try and name the best player you can. You'd be surprised how much consistently having championship supporting casts can go towards building the hype of an individual.

[Johnny Jones]

No. I have him at #11.

[Fresh Kid]

No. I have him at #11.
http://www4.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Kobe+Bryant+Denver+Nuggets+v+Los+Angeles+Lakers+Nf ecogPNy63l.jpg

[G-Funk]

are u stupid?

[G-Funk]

No. I have him at #11.http://cdn.niketalk.com/9/9c/350x700px-LL-9c4230a9_shaq-laugh.gif

[Electric Slide]

If you actually read what he wrote he just proved that Kobe isnt as inefficient as you guys believe he is
Pretty sure he is referring to the other aspects like passing, rebounding, and defense.

[Haks]

:applause:
Pretty sure he is referring to the other aspects like passing, rebounding, and defense.
He put up ts% numbers bra

[Electric Slide]

:applause:
He put up ts% numbers bra
What's your point? All of those guys listed in the TS% were more than just scorers. They were also dominant rebounders and defenders.

Kobe on the other hand just stands in the corner and guards the team's worst offensive player. He also gives up on screens and refuses to take charges.

[2010splash]

Well, he's got no case over Jordan, LeBron, Wilt, Magic, Kareem, Russell, Shaq.

That's 7 right there. Then you have Duncan and Bird, and most people think both were better than Kobe. So there's 9.

So it comes down to whether you think he's ahead of Hakeem. If so, he's just at #10. If not, he's outside the top 10.

[Round Mound]

Nope, and its not even close.

Funny when people put him on par with guys like LeBron, Shaq, Duncan.

Whos going to build a franchise around Kobe over one of them provided there is an equal supporting cast?

Forget these guys, most rational basketball people would build around Patrick Ewing over Kobe.

If you look at guys most people consider top 10 all-time they are extremely dominant in all facets of the game and are EFFICIENT. I think Bill Russell is the only other people put in the top 10 thats career shooting percentage is below 50%. And thats because he is highly regarded for DEFENSE AND REBOUNDING.

Kobes main attribute is scoring the basketball and his career high is still around 46.8%. Career is 45%. Compare that to the real greats, and you realize just how outclassed he is.

:applause:

[The Iron Fist]

Even current Duncan has a bigger impact than prime Kobe ever did. :confusedshrug:
Kobe never lost a finals with a 3-2 lead.

[NumberSix]

He's in the discussion.

[Nashty]

:facepalm Of course not.

He's not even top 100 in terms of impact.

[Vienceslav]

I don't know what's worse saying that he is top 5 or denying he is top 10, if you are going to take the time to make an account and post here at least don't embarrass yourselves.

[havoc33]

Stupid topic, but yeah I'll bite: YES. Kobe is a top 10 player. He's somewhere in the 6-7 range. Jordan, Kareem, Russell, Wilt and Magic round up the top 5. Then you can discuss where you want to put Kobe, Bird, Duncan, Shaq and Olajuwon in the next 5 places.

[JellyBean]

Without a doubt. I have gone on record saying I don't care where you rank Kobe because he is among the all-time greats. But for some folks to have Kobe outside of the top 10, is just flat out insane!!! Kobe's body of work speaks for itself. It is worthy of all-time top 10 greatest NBA player status. And for the record I have Kobe at #7

Kareem
Jordan
Magic
Wilt
Bird
Russell
Kobe
Shaq
Duncan
Lebron

[Overdrive]

He's in the Shaq, Duncan, Kobe & Hakeem tier. As of lately for me he slipped to the tailend of this tier, because of his inability to evenly adapt his playstyle to his age. Yes, 28 PPG at his age are quite impressive, but the lack of defensive effort just makes him a worse player than he actually could be. I think he gave up his championship aspirations during the Dallas series and now just plays for himself and AT records to further set him apart from other all time greats.

Another aspect is his peak. As awesome as it was he missed the play offs during his 3 peak years and quite possibly the lack of another reliable scoring option made his gaudy scoring numbers possible. So if he had a good enough second best player he might've scored less, but reached more team success.

Still he's in the top 10 and Lebron recently joined this tier of greats, but he is behind Kobe so far and I think he will stay there for a while.

[TheMarkMadsen]

He's in the Shaq, Duncan, Kobe & Hakeem tier. As of lately for me he slipped to the tailend of this tier, because of his inability to evenly adapt his playstyle to his age. Yes, 28 PPG at his age are quite impressive, but the lack of defensive effort just makes him a worse player than he actually could be. I think he gave up his championship aspirations during the Dallas series and now just plays for himself and AT records to further set him apart from other all time greats.

Another aspect is his peak. As awesome as it was he missed the play offs during his 3 peak years and quite possibly the lack of another reliable scoring option made his gaudy scoring numbers possible. So if he had a good enough second best player he might've scored less, but reached more team success.

Still he's in the top 10 and Lebron recently joined this tier of greats, but he is behind Kobe so far and I think he will stay there for a while.


You criticize Kobe for not "adjusting" towards the tail end of his career even tho he averaged 28 5 5 and made the all NBA 1st team last year...

Yet apparently Shaqs with the celtics an Hakeem's run with the raptors doesn't bother you at all.

Yeah no biase there

[Unbiased_one]

You criticize Kobe for not "adjusting" towards the tail end of his career even tho he averaged 28 5 5 and made the all NBA 1st team last year...

Yet apparently Shaqs with the celtics an Hakeem's run with the raptors doesn't bother you at all.

Yeah no biase there

Do you honestly believe he should have made that all nba team?

IIRC Kobe got all defensive team votes this year...that's how much the media loves him.

[Psileas]

Wilt
Jordan
Kareem
Russell
Magic
Shaq
Bird
Kobe
Duncan
arg.LeBron/Hakeem/Oscar

So, he is in my top-10, but I don't see him move significantly upwards.

[rhythmic]

Eh.
1) Jordan
2) Kareem
3) Russell
4) Magic
5) Wilt
6) Bird
7) Kobe
8) Duncan
9) Shaq
10) LeBron

He can definitely surpass Bird, Magic & Wilt if he does something drastic, like have 3 more incredible years (win a title, Finals MVP & break the scoring record). Break the all-time All-NBA 1st team record & All-NBA 1st team defense record.

How can he not be in the top 10? Heck, I might even consider putting him over Russell as well. Don't see him being better then Jordan or Kareem unless somehow magically he three-peats with LA as a top 3 player in the game the next 3 years. Basically impossible at this stage in his career.

I think both Duncan & Kobe simply have had a more complete career then Shaquille has had, in terms of accolodes and team success.

Peak wise, Shaquille is arguably #1 of all-time though...
I really hate to put Shaq that low but I just can't pick him over the players above him.

[Overdrive]

You criticize Kobe for not "adjusting" towards the tail end of his career even tho he averaged 28 5 5 and made the all NBA 1st team last year...

Yet apparently Shaqs with the celtics an Hakeem's run with the raptors doesn't bother you at all.

Yeah no biase there

Shaq and Hakeem were breaking down physically at that stage of their career. Aside from the achilles Kobe was at comparable good health since '11.

My criticism is that Kobe could've helped his team more by doing less on offense, but that was up for discussion the whole year anyway.

[2010splash]

1. Jordan
2. Wilt
3. Russell
4. Kareem
5. LeBron
6. Magic
7. Shaq
8. Duncan
9. Bird
10. Kobe/Hakeem
11. Hakeem/Kobe

It's possible but you can argue either way.

[NoGunzJustSkillz]

I have him at #10, but LeBron takes his spot (and maybe more) if he wins another chip.
and i bet you discredit kobe winning 3 with shaq.

[NoGunzJustSkillz]

kobe top 5 goat after this season, bank on it clowns.

[riseagainst]

Why do people dislike the use of TS%?

agendas.

[rhythmic]

1. Jordan
2. Wilt
3. Russell
4. Kareem
5. LeBron
6. Magic
7. Shaq
8. Duncan
9. Bird
10. Kobe/Hakeem
11. Hakeem/Kobe

It's possible but you can argue either way.


Kobe Vs. Hakeem

REGULAR SEASON

17 seasons vs. 18 seasons
1,239 total games vs. 1,238 total games (:eek: )
25.5 PPG vs. 21.8 PPG
31,617 career points vs. 26,946 career points
5.3 RPG vs. 11.1 RPG
6575 career rebounds vs. 13,748 career rebounds
4.8 APG vs. 2.5 APG
5,887 career assists vs. 3,058 career assists
1.5 SPG vs. 1.7 SPG
0.5 BPG vs. 3.1 BPG

.454 FG% vs. .512 FG%
.838 FT% vs. .712 FT%
23.4 PER vs. 23.6 PER
.555 TS% vs. .553 TS%
173.3 Win Share vs. 162.8 Win Share

PLAYOFFS

15 post-season births vs. 15 post-season births
220 total games vs. 145 total games
25.6 PPG vs. 25.9 PPG
5,640 career points vs. 3,755 career points
5.1 RPG vs. 11.2 RPG
4.7 APG vs. 3.2 APG
1.4 SPG vs. 1.7 SPG
0.7 BPG vs. 3.3 BPG

.448 FG% vs. .528 FG%
.816 FT% vs. .719 FT%
22.4 PER vs. 25.7 PER
.541 TS% vs. .569 TS%
28.3 Win Share vs. 22.6 Win Share

7 Final Appearances vs. 2 Final Appearances
5 Championships vs. 2 Championships

ACCOMPLISHMENTS

15 All-Stars vs. 12 All-Stars
1 MVP vs. 1 MVP
2 Finals MVP vs. 2 Finals MVP
0 DPOTY vs. 2 DPOTY
11 All-NBA 1st Team vs. 6 All-NBA 1st Team
9 All-Defensive 1st Team vs. 5 All-Defensive 1st Team
11 times Top 5 in MVP voting vs. 6 times Top 5 in MVP votings

Kobe played 1 less season, and has already accomplished far more in this league then Hakeem ever has. Thei numbers are similar despite Hakeem playing in an era where offensive efficiency was much higher then it is today. Kobe has won far more as well.

Kobe is easily better then Hakeem in terms of their respective career resumes.

[crisoner]

Do you honestly believe he should have made that all nba team?

IIRC Kobe got all defensive team votes this year...that's how much the media loves him.

How much the media loves Kobe?

LMAO

Do you read what the National Press writes about him all the time?
Dude gets no love.

Are certain people living in other worlds? WTF?

[Jlamb47]

1. Jordan
2. Kareem
3. Kobe
4. Duncan
5. Shaq
6. Hakeem
7. Bird
8. Magic
9. Lebron

[crisoner]

[QUOTE=rhythmic

[crisoner]

New question for the Kobe stans

Which other modern players(1980-present) has a FG% as low as Kobes(45.4%), yet is still regarded as an all-time great?

Try and name the best player you can. You'd be surprised how much consistently having championship supporting casts can go towards building the hype of an individual.

Is that all you have his field goal percentage?

That trumps everything else on the mans resume?

Dude....you are reaching.


Your whole FG BS is just that. Players have different types of geams.
Certain players will have higher FG's because of the type of game or position they have.
Kobe is a high volume scorer. He can score in many ways and when he gets hot he gets hot.
But he will always try to shoot his way out of a slump and will always take the shot.
Lets compare him now....

Jordan - Same position as Kobe but hey it's Jordan GOAT lets move on.
Wilt - Low Post Player of course higher FG
Russell - Would be a low post player as well but he was all about defense
Kareem - Low Post player...Sky Hook
LeBron - His game is best when he drives and dunks...great passer as well
Magic - Magic all about passing making shots for others
Shaq - Low Post game...of course higher FG
Duncan - Low Post game..also has that sweet bank shot
Bird - Bird is probably the best pure shooter the game has seen
Hakeem - Low Post player


If you dislike Kobe's game for his FG alone....you are not a true basketball fan and you have an agenda.
The man is great at what he does...as a Laker fan you live and die by it. And all it has done is brought are franchise 5 titles.

[pudman13]

Is that all you have his field goal percentage?

That trumps everything else on the mans resume?

Dude....you are reaching.

I don't think that is reaching at all. It shows that despite his skills and ability, he may not be helping his team as much as the other players on the list, and in fact, may be occasionally hurting his team by taking on too much of the offensive burden.

I do think that FG% is expected to be lower for a guard, but still, two people who few seem to rank as high as Kobe on these all time lists:
Oscar Robertson--.485, Jerry West--.474. (Note that a forward who shows up on most people's all time great list is Elgin Baylor, whose FG% is quite low--.431. He may be another case of an amazingly skilled player who could have been better if he was a bit more selective. We don't really have enough video evidence to judge.)

Longeivity is an x-factor. How much credit do you give someone for that, and how much slack in regard to cumulative stats do you give players who played in an era where they played 4 years (or in the case of people like Bird and Maravich, 5) of college when they were probably already at a skill level to play in the NBA?

[andgar923]

But on topic:

Michael Jordon
Magic Johnson
Wilt Chamberlain
Bill Russell
Larry Bird
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
(no order)

Are above Kobe Bryant, so Kobe is #7 for me, and he'll likely stay there unless someone surpasses him.

So he's above Shaq and Hakeem as well? :rolleyes:

Duncan also has a strong argument
Some will even argue that Moses Malone should be ahead as well.
And Bron will mos def be ahead of him (if he isn't already)

And naturally, there's the select fringe group of people that will fight to have either Oscar or Elgin in the top 5 as well (not sure if they're better than Kobe, perhaps Oscar has a legit argument)

[rhythmic]

So he's above Shaq and Hakeem as well? :rolleyes:

Duncan also has a strong argument
Some will even argue that Moses Malone should be ahead as well.
And Bron will mos def be ahead of him (if he isn't already)

And naturally, there's the select fringe group of people that will fight to have either Oscar or Elgin in the top 5 as well (not sure if they're better than Kobe, perhaps Oscar has a legit argument)

Kobe is a better scorer, playmaker, won more & has more accolades in less seasons then Hakeem. Hakeem was a better defender and rebounder.

Their resume speaks for it self, Kobe is clearly ahead of Hakeem.
The guy simply achieved more in less time.

Heck their PER, TS% and Win Share is almost identical; Kobe was a more offensively dominant player while Hakeem was a more defensively dominant player. Arguably the two most skilled offensive players of All-Time. What separates them is Kobe's 5 rings to Hakeem's 2, and Kobe simply accomplishing more in the league then Hakeem has.

I don't see a case for Hakeem.

[andgar923]

[QUOTE=rhythmic

[rhythmic]

[QUOTE=andgar923]:rolleyes:

Hakeem is a better player, anybody that saw him play will tell you that.

Only thing Kobe did better than Hakeem was shoot more, and shoot from the 3pt line

[red1]

yes, he is firmly in the 6-10 range alongside hakeem bron duncan and shaq

[Legends66NBA7]

I do think that FG% is expected to be lower for a guard, but still, two people who few seem to rank as high as Kobe on these all time lists:
Oscar Robertson--.485, Jerry West--.474.

Different eras. Robertson and West didn't play a with a 3 point line and they would have a lower overall fg% if they used that shot a lot. Bryant takes about 4 3's a game in his career, so I think the best way to probably compare West vs Robertson vs Bryant in terms of their efficiency is their 2pt%, which Bryant has about 48+%. That makes him in the middle of Robertson and West.

The difference is defense played on guards in the 60's-70's vs 90's - present would also make this a more complicated comparison, as well.

[kshutts1]

He's borderline.

Jordan, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Russell, Shaq, Kareem are the clear-cut top tier of players, IMO. That's 7.

The next "tier" is comprised of...
Duncan, Kobe, Hakeem, West, Oscar, Lebron. Arguments can be made for: Barkley, Moses, KG, Pettit.

In that tier, I'd say Hakeem is first (8), then it's all a matter of preference between the remaining players. Pettit is likely last, within that tier, though to be fair I'm only saying that because he's a "50's" player, and I know very little about that era.

TL;DR
Kobe is either 9th or 10th AT BEST, and he's fighting Duncan, West, Oscar Barkley, Moses, KG for one of those 2 spots.

[2010splash]

Kobe Vs. Hakeem

REGULAR SEASON

17 seasons vs. 18 seasons
1,239 total games vs. 1,238 total games (:eek: )
25.5 PPG vs. 21.8 PPG
31,617 career points vs. 26,946 career points
5.3 RPG vs. 11.1 RPG
6575 career rebounds vs. 13,748 career rebounds
4.8 APG vs. 2.5 APG
5,887 career assists vs. 3,058 career assists
1.5 SPG vs. 1.7 SPG
0.5 BPG vs. 3.1 BPG

.454 FG% vs. .512 FG%
.838 FT% vs. .712 FT%
23.4 PER vs. 23.6 PER
.555 TS% vs. .553 TS%
173.3 Win Share vs. 162.8 Win Share

PLAYOFFS

15 post-season births vs. 15 post-season births
220 total games vs. 145 total games
25.6 PPG vs. 25.9 PPG
5,640 career points vs. 3,755 career points
5.1 RPG vs. 11.2 RPG
4.7 APG vs. 3.2 APG
1.4 SPG vs. 1.7 SPG
0.7 BPG vs. 3.3 BPG

.448 FG% vs. .528 FG%
.816 FT% vs. .719 FT%
22.4 PER vs. 25.7 PER
.541 TS% vs. .569 TS%
28.3 Win Share vs. 22.6 Win Share

7 Final Appearances vs. 2 Final Appearances
5 Championships vs. 2 Championships

ACCOMPLISHMENTS

15 All-Stars vs. 12 All-Stars
1 MVP vs. 1 MVP
2 Finals MVP vs. 2 Finals MVP
0 DPOTY vs. 2 DPOTY
11 All-NBA 1st Team vs. 6 All-NBA 1st Team
9 All-Defensive 1st Team vs. 5 All-Defensive 1st Team
11 times Top 5 in MVP voting vs. 6 times Top 5 in MVP votings

Kobe played 1 less season, and has already accomplished far more in this league then Hakeem ever has. Thei numbers are similar despite Hakeem playing in an era where offensive efficiency was much higher then it is today. Kobe has won far more as well.

Kobe is easily better then Hakeem in terms of their respective career resumes.
I won't object to anyone ranking him over Hakeem. But that makes him 10th at best. All this talk of top 5, 6 or 7 is just madness.

The top 5 are Jordan, LeBron, Wilt, Russell and Kareem in no order. They pretty much can't be passed. Magic, Shaq and Duncan are definitely above Kobe as well.

Then you have Bird, who's kind of overrated and perhaps #9 all time. Maybe you can put Kobe over him, maybe not. 10th is more reasonable.

[andgar923]

I give your entire post an asterisk*, because you're a dumbass.
*yawn*

Hakeem>> Kobe

Who went to whom to learn how to play basketball?

People flock to him in the off season for advice.

Mid range, Hakeem>Kobe
Post, Hakeem> Kobe
Footwork, Hakeem>Kobe

Hakeem can do everything Kobe can offensively better aside from 3pt shooting, and offense is what Kobe is known for.
Defensively it's a joke actually. Kobe doesn't come close to Hakeem defensively.

[rhythmic]

I won't object to anyone ranking him over Hakeem. But that makes him 10th at best. All this talk of top 5, 6 or 7 is just madness.

He also has a more impressive resume over Duncan, LeBron and Shaquille buddy. So that puts him 6th.

1) LeBron --> greater longevity (so far), more rings, far more accolades & more NBA records. LeBron can one day pass him, but he still has ways to go.

2) Duncan --> better head to head, more rings, more accolades, longer longevity.

3) Shaquille --> more accolades, more rings, longer longevity.

The thing you guys can't comprehend is that Kobe has a chance to break some incredible records in this league. Him playing as a top 5 player for over 13 years, who does that exactly?! His longevity is impressive and is the #1 detriment he is higher then guys like Duncan, Shaquille & Hakeem who had more impact in their respective peaks.

I'm not ranking Kobe higher then them because I think he's better (I'd draft those 3 bigs over Kobe anyday if they were all in their prime). But the fact is, take a close look at everything Kobe has accomplished and tell me any of those player's resumes are better.

Heck, if Kobe plays 2-3 more seasons and plays as a top 10 player he will surpass Bird too, based on longevity and accomplishments. If he wins another ring and a finals MVP, he jumps over Wilt & Russell too. :D

[NoGunzJustSkillz]

*yawn*

Hakeem>> Kobe

Who went to whom to learn how to play basketball?

People flock to him in the off season for advice.

Mid range, Hakeem>Kobe
Post, Hakeem> Kobe
Footwork, Hakeem>Kobe

Hakeem can do everything Kobe can offensively better aside from 3pt shooting, and offense is what Kobe is known for.
Defensively it's a joke actually. Kobe doesn't come close to Hakeem defensively.
:coleman:

[Fudge]

I won't object to anyone ranking him over Hakeem. But that makes him 10th at best. All this talk of top 5, 6 or 7 is just madness.

The top 5 are Jordan, LeBron, Wilt, Russell and Kareem in no order. They pretty much can't be passed. Magic, Shaq and Duncan are definitely above Kobe as well.

Then you have Bird, who's kind of overrated and perhaps #9 all time. Maybe you can put Kobe over him, maybe not. 10th is more reasonable.
:oldlol:

[andgar923]

:coleman:
:pimp:

Mad?

:D

[andgar923]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vww3lmLQQGM

[TonyMontana]

Is that all you have his field goal percentage?

That trumps everything else on the mans resume?

Dude....you are reaching.


Your whole FG BS is just that. Players have different types of geams.
Certain players will have higher FG's because of the type of game or position they have.
Kobe is a high volume scorer. He can score in many ways and when he gets hot he gets hot.
But he will always try to shoot his way out of a slump and will always take the shot.
Lets compare him now....

Jordan - Same position as Kobe but hey it's Jordan GOAT lets move on.
Wilt - Low Post Player of course higher FG
Russell - Would be a low post player as well but he was all about defense
Kareem - Low Post player...Sky Hook
LeBron - His game is best when he drives and dunks...great passer as well
Magic - Magic all about passing making shots for others
Shaq - Low Post game...of course higher FG
Duncan - Low Post game..also has that sweet bank shot
Bird - Bird is probably the best pure shooter the game has seen
Hakeem - Low Post player


If you dislike Kobe's game for his FG alone....you are not a true basketball fan and you have an agenda.
The man is great at what he does...as a Laker fan you live and die by it. And all it has done is brought are franchise 5 titles.

Reaching?

Every other player in the consensus top 10 that I listed is shooting 50% or higher.

Why should Kobe be held to a lower standard?

Because he chooses to shoot lower percentage shots from the field? Are you ****ing kidding me? Thats a reason why he is worse. Give me shots at the rim over fadeaways any day. Difficulty of shot means nothing to me, it just means your incapable of taking the same good looks.

:oldlol:

Once again I am waiting for anyone to name the best player they can with Kobes FG%(45.4) or worse in the modern era. Depending on your preferences you'll get either Allen Iverson, Jason Kidd, or Isiah Thomas. This is Kobes company and who he is most comparable to in terms of impact on the game. I'm not going to reward him for "5 rings" just because he was playing with stacked championship level supporting casts for nearly his entire career.

[kshutts1]

Once again I am waiting for anyone to name the best player they can with Kobes FG%(45.4) or worse in the modern era. Depending on your preferences you'll get either Allen Iverson, Jason Kidd, or Isiah Thomas. This is Kobes company and who he is most comparable to in terms of impact on the game. I'm not going to reward him for "5 rings" just because he was playing with stacked championship level supporting casts for nearly his entire career.

Probably coming in to this quite late, but are you seriously rating Kobe solely on FG%? If not, and you're instead using it as it should be used (as a tool), then what's the point of the comparison you're trying to make?

Lastly, please define "modern era".

[rhythmic]

*yawn*

Hakeem>> Kobe

Who went to whom to learn how to play basketball?

People flock to him in the off season for advice.

Mid range, Hakeem>Kobe
Post, Hakeem> Kobe
Footwork, Hakeem>Kobe

Hakeem can do everything Kobe can offensively better aside from 3pt shooting, and offense is what Kobe is known for.
Defensively it's a joke actually. Kobe doesn't come close to Hakeem defensively.

The only thing I agree with you on is the defensive side of things.
Mid-range? :oldlol: Kobe is arguably the best mid-range scorer in league history.
Post? Kobe might just be the best scoring low-post threat in league history at guard. He shoots like 65% in the post. Yes Hakeem is incredible in the post, but he was a center...Kobe is a guard. :rolleyes:
Footwork? Kobe arguably has the best footwork of all-time.

So basically you picked 3 criteria's that Kobe is amazing at and claimed Hakeem was better; so I'm guessing you were trying to be ignorant, get a reaction out of me or flat out delusional?

Probably all of the above, eh?

[DMAVS41]

Probably coming in to this quite late, but are you seriously rating Kobe solely on FG%? If not, and you're instead using it as it should be used (as a tool), then what's the point of the comparison you're trying to make?

Lastly, please define "modern era".

No. His point is that on the thing that Kobe does best...his number 1 attribute...he doesn't do as well as some of the other guys in the top 10 on efficiency from the field.

I think it's a bit unfair because Kobe's overall efficiency is probably as good or better than a lot of those guys.

But his point is valid from the field.

And because Kobe doesn't do anything else at the elite level...that's his calling card. He's not rebounding, defending, passing, or playing team ball at an elite level like some of the other top 10 players ever.

He doesn't dominate defensively in the paint like a wilt, russell, duncan, hakeem...he doesn't score in the paint like kareem and shaq and.

he isn't nearly as efficient or as dominant defensively as Lebron or Jordan.

He doesn't play team ball like Bird or Magic...etc.

That is his point. His calling card is scoring...and he's done that in the playoffs on somewhat pedestrian efficiency from the field. Especially in the playoffs at 44.8% for his career.

Again though....TS is more fair...and Kobe has a 54% TS percentage. By comparison, Bird has a 55% TS percentage.

Which is why it's absurd when Kobe stans claim that playing with Shaq actually hurt his legacy.

26/10/3 58.4% TS
26/5/5 54.1% TS

Which player is better in the playoffs?

[kshutts1]

@TonyMontana,

If you insist on using FG%, I would suggest eFG%, as it's a much better (though still not all-encompassing) measure of shooting accuracy.

That being said, here's the list of the top 250 all time:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/efg_pct_career.html

Kobe is not on the list. His career is .487. Jordan IS on the list... .508. In other words, .02 ahead of Kobe.
As for other things I noticed... the list is not exactly littered with GOAT candidates, or even HOFers, necessarily. We already knew that rating players based upon FG% was relatively ineffective, but even we were to break it down to just SGs, then the majority of the players above Kobe are... Wade, Jordan, and 3p specialists (who obviously benefit from shooting so many 3s, a lot of which are wide open as they are not primary creators for their teams).

So ending result? Worthless stat in a vacuum, though Kobe is not nearly as bad as you make him out to be. Use some context my man.

[TonyMontana]

Probably coming in to this quite late, but are you seriously rating Kobe solely on FG%? If not, and you're instead using it as it should be used (as a tool), then what's the point of the comparison you're trying to make?

Lastly, please define "modern era".

A tool. FG% should be looked at heavily for any players thats niche role is scoring the basketball. If we are talking about Bill Russell not a big deal since defense and rebounding is where this guy made his mark on history. But for Kobe, a guy whose only elite attribute is scoring the ball? Yeah you bet I'm not going to overlook that shit.

We are comparing him to guys like Shaq, Jordan, Magic, Bird, LeBron here. And he is clearly outclassed. All of the bigman make impacts on defense and rebounding that Kobe cant touch. The perimeter guys make their teammates better(except Jordan). And Jordan is just a richmans version of Kobe anyway. 30 PPG on 50% shooting for his career. What does Kobe have over any of them?

The point is to show that Kobe is perhaps the most overrated player not just in NBA History, but sports history. It is incredible just how far playing for the Lakers and having championship level supporting casts goes towards building a "legacy" for casual fans that dont have a clue. No other player in recent memory has shot like Kobe did and recieved even half of the praise. Iverson gets called a chucker, Kidd gets that he can't shoot. Isiah Thomas is kind of forgotten in the dark(and his FG% got heaily brought down by his last two years in the league). Kobe gets called "top ten all-time". :oldlol: Just because he played on teams with prime Shaquille O'Neal and the top frontcourt in the league

Modern era = 1980-present. Don't care about old time perimeter players that couldn't even dribble the ball without staring at the ground.

[Heavincent]

You guys know TonyMontana is the OP's alt account, right?

[kshutts1]

No. His point is that on the thing that Kobe does best...his number 1 attribute...he doesn't do as well as some of the other guys in the top 10 on efficiency from the field.

I think it's a bit unfair because Kobe's overall efficiency is probably as good or better than a lot of those guys.

But his point is valid from the field.

And because Kobe doesn't do anything else at the elite level...that's his calling card. He's not rebounding, defending, passing, or playing team ball at an elite level like some of the other top 10 players ever.

He doesn't dominate defensively in the paint like a wilt, russell, duncan, hakeem...he doesn't score in the paint like kareem and shaq and.

he isn't nearly as efficient or as dominant defensively as Lebron or Jordan.

He doesn't play team ball like Bird or Magic...etc.

That is his point. His calling card is scoring...and he's done that in the playoffs on somewhat pedestrian efficiency from the field. Especially in the playoffs at 44.8% for his career.

Again though....TS is more fair...and Kobe has a 54% TS percentage. By comparison, Bird has a 55% TS percentage.

Which is why it's absurd when Kobe stans claim that playing with Shaq actually hurt his legacy.

26/10/3 58.4% TS
26/5/5 54.1% TS

Which player is better in the playoffs?

Thanks for clearing up his point, and kudos to noting the TS%, and I'd like to add eFG% as well, though Kobe doesn't fare as well with that metric.

Just another case of a "hater" manipulating certain statistics.

And current Kobe is not elite in many, if any, categories, save scoring, but career Kobe most certainly was. At one point he was an elite playmaker, defender, and scorer.

[pudman13]

Different eras. Robertson and West didn't play a with a 3 point line and they would have a lower overall fg% if they used that shot a lot. Bryant takes about 4 3's a game in his career, so I think the best way to probably compare West vs Robertson vs Bryant in terms of their efficiency is their 2pt%, which Bryant has about 48+%. That makes him in the middle of Robertson and West.

OK, that's a fair criticism (I suppose I could mention that overall NBA FG% was a tad lower in the 60s v.s the 00s, but it's not by that large a margin.) Nonetheless, as mentioned in another thread, it's curious that Oscar's star has fell so far over the years. The fact is that there's almost no video of him in his prime, and even then he was never a flashy player, so people have a hard time realizing just how great he was. He's the Tim Duncan of his era--completely effective without ever doing things that would attract attention.

Is now a time for me to ask (and I'm not trolling here--just asking for honest opinions from people old enough to remember) if I'm the only one who liked the game better before the 3-pointer?

[TonyMontana]

No. His point is that on the thing that Kobe does best...his number 1 attribute...he doesn't do as well as some of the other guys in the top 10 on efficiency from the field.

I think it's a bit unfair because Kobe's overall efficiency is probably as good or better than a lot of those guys.

But his point is valid from the field.

And because Kobe doesn't do anything else at the elite level...that's his calling card. He's not rebounding, defending, passing, or playing team ball at an elite level like some of the other top 10 players ever.

He doesn't dominate defensively in the paint like a wilt, russell, duncan, hakeem...he doesn't score in the paint like kareem and shaq and.

he isn't nearly as efficient or as dominant defensively as Lebron or Jordan.

He doesn't play team ball like Bird or Magic...etc.

That is his point. His calling card is scoring...and he's done that in the playoffs on somewhat pedestrian efficiency from the field. Especially in the playoffs at 44.8% for his career.

Again though....TS is more fair...and Kobe has a 54% TS percentage. By comparison, Bird has a 55% TS percentage.

Which is why it's absurd when Kobe stans claim that playing with Shaq actually hurt his legacy.

26/10/3 58.4% TS
26/5/5 54.1% TS

Which player is better in the playoffs?

:applause:

I would personally go with the 26/10/3 58.4% TS

[DMAVS41]

:applause:

I would personally go with the 26/10/3 58.4% TS

Add in a much better elimination game player and game 7 player.

Has actually won series as the underdog.

Had to play with more attention on him in the playoffs than Kobe as his teams weren't as good (a favorite Kobe stan argument) Didn't have the GOAT coach for a majority of his career.

Like I said before...this is exactly why claiming Kobe's first 3 titles with Shaq hurt his career (the new Kobe stan mantra) is absurd. On his play alone...Kobe simply hasn't separated himself in the playoffs from a guy like Dirk. That's just a fact.

[kshutts1]

A tool. FG% should be looked at heavily for any players thats niche role is scoring the basketball. If we are talking about Bill Russell not a big deal since defense and rebounding is where this guy made his mark on history. But for Kobe, a guy whose only elite attribute is scoring the ball? Yeah you bet I'm not going to overlook that shit.

We are comparing him to guys like Shaq, Jordan, Magic, Bird, LeBron here. And he is clearly outclassed. All of the bigman make impacts on defense and rebounding that Kobe cant touch. The perimeter guys make their teammates better(except Jordan). And Jordan is just a richmans version of Kobe anyway. 30 PPG on 50% shooting for his career. What does Kobe have over any of them?

The point is to show that Kobe is perhaps the most overrated player not just in NBA History, but sports history. It is incredible just how far playing for the Lakers and having championship level supporting casts goes towards building a "legacy" for casual fans that dont have a clue. No other player in recent memory has shot like Kobe did and recieved even half of the praise. Iverson gets called a chucker, Kidd gets that he can't shoot. Isiah Thomas is kind of forgotten in the dark(and his FG% got heaily brought down by his last two years in the league). Kobe gets called "top ten all-time". :oldlol: Just because he played on teams with prime Shaquille O'Neal and the top frontcourt in the league

Modern era = 1980-present. Don't care about old time perimeter players that couldn't even dribble the ball without staring at the ground.
I know you can't be argued with, but for once I"ll actually take the bait.

First of all, I"ll be the first to tell you that Kobe is not on Jordan's level. He is second among SGs, though.

Second, both Jordan, and Kobe, make/made their teammates better. They do so by taking the scoring burden/pressure off of them, by getting double- and triple-teamed and (sometimes) passing out of it, to an (theoretically) open teammate.

Third, Kobe was once a first rate defender (again, not on Jordan's level, but 100% a 1st team candidate). I can't think of many perimeter players his age (34? 35?) that were still top-notch defenders, so I won't hold his current lack of defensive ability against him.

Fourth, Kobe has, whether through his own actions or not, dealt with more team turmoil/turnover than most of the other GOAT/top 10 candidates. A few exceptions include: Wilt, Kareem, Shaq. The vast majority of the "greatest ever" players had incredibly stability in terms of supporting cast, coaching, and team. Minor point? Perhaps, but when nit-picking all time greats, it's a factor to consider.

Fifth, Kobe is not an efficient scorer. He may not be the most efficient, but he is not inefficient. Using eFG or TS, he is actually quite efficient.

Lastly... combine his very good efficiency with elite level playmaking, scoring, passing, defending, along with his longevity, and career accomplishments, plus the non-quantifiable "wow" and "fear" factors... and he most certainly has a case for top 10 all time, though he's by no means a sure thing.

[Deuce Bigalow]

No. His point is that on the thing that Kobe does best...his number 1 attribute...he doesn't do as well as some of the other guys in the top 10 on efficiency from the field.

I think it's a bit unfair because Kobe's overall efficiency is probably as good or better than a lot of those guys.

But his point is valid from the field.

And because Kobe doesn't do anything else at the elite level...that's his calling card. He's not rebounding, defending, passing, or playing team ball at an elite level like some of the other top 10 players ever.

He doesn't dominate defensively in the paint like a wilt, russell, duncan, hakeem...he doesn't score in the paint like kareem and shaq and.

he isn't nearly as efficient or as dominant defensively as Lebron or Jordan.

He doesn't play team ball like Bird or Magic...etc.

That is his point. His calling card is scoring...and he's done that in the playoffs on somewhat pedestrian efficiency from the field. Especially in the playoffs at 44.8% for his career.

Again though....TS is more fair...and Kobe has a 54% TS percentage. By comparison, Bird has a 55% TS percentage.

Which is why it's absurd when Kobe stans claim that playing with Shaq actually hurt his legacy.

26/10/3 58.4% TS
26/5/5 54.1% TS

Which player is better in the playoffs?
Hakeem's team was knocked out of the playoffs in the first round 9 times in his career. He only had 6 playoff runs that were at least 10 games, and only 3 Finals appearances. Meaning a large portion of his playoff stats are first round or second round series. Compared to Kobe who has 7 Finals runs and has had a playoff run less than 10 games only 4 times in his career. Plus Kobe was not a starter for 20 of his 220 playoff games, while Hakeem was not a starter for only 5 of his 146 playoff games. It's like you comparing Kobe's playoff stats to Dirk's, who are misleading as well since his teams have not gone as deep as much as Kobe's too.

Kobe's playoff stats as a starter:
27.4 PPG / 5.4 RPG / 5.1 APG / 1.5 SPG / 45% FG / 34% 3PT / 82% FT / 54% TS in 200 games

[rhythmic]

Relative to competition, Jordan versus Kobe.

Jordan's FG% in the 90's --> .486
League average in FG% among perimeter players (PG & SG): .462
Difference: .022

Kobe's FG% in 2000-13: .456
League average in FG% among perimeter players (PG & SG): .436
Difference: .020

:pimp:

[TonyMontana]

Add in a much better elimination game player and game 7 player.

Has actually won series as the underdog.

Had to play with more attention on him in the playoffs than Kobe as his teams weren't as good (a favorite Kobe stan argument) Didn't have the GOAT coach for a majority of his career.

Like I said before...this is exactly why claiming Kobe's first 3 titles with Shaq hurt his career (the new Kobe stan mantra) is absurd. On his play alone...Kobe simply hasn't separated himself in the playoffs from a guy like Dirk. That's just a fact.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

When Kobe doesn't have the overwhelming favorite in a playoff series, he underperforms more than any other "star" in NBA History. Here are his stats when his team is in jeopardy of losing. You will not see a bigger dropoff.

Kobe Bryant Elimination Game Averages(when his teams season is over with a loss):
22.3 PPG, 5.6 RPG, 3.7 APG, 1.2 SPG, .6 BPG, 3.0 TOPG, 41.4 FG%, 27.5 3P%, 77.9 FT%

Kobe Bryant Game 7 Stats(winner advances):
21.4 PPG, 7.1 RPG, 5.1 APG, .9 SPG, 1.6 BPG, 2.0 TOPG, 39.5 FG%, 32.4 3P%, 70.2 FT%

And as you said, he has never won a single series where his team wasn't favored to win.

[kshutts1]

No. His point is that on the thing that Kobe does best...his number 1 attribute...he doesn't do as well as some of the other guys in the top 10 on efficiency from the field.

I think it's a bit unfair because Kobe's overall efficiency is probably as good or better than a lot of those guys.

But his point is valid from the field.

And because Kobe doesn't do anything else at the elite level...that's his calling card. He's not rebounding, defending, passing, or playing team ball at an elite level like some of the other top 10 players ever.

He doesn't dominate defensively in the paint like a wilt, russell, duncan, hakeem...he doesn't score in the paint like kareem and shaq and.

he isn't nearly as efficient or as dominant defensively as Lebron or Jordan.

He doesn't play team ball like Bird or Magic...etc.

That is his point. His calling card is scoring...and he's done that in the playoffs on somewhat pedestrian efficiency from the field. Especially in the playoffs at 44.8% for his career.

Again though....TS is more fair...and Kobe has a 54% TS percentage. By comparison, Bird has a 55% TS percentage.

Which is why it's absurd when Kobe stans claim that playing with Shaq actually hurt his legacy.

26/10/3 58.4% TS
26/5/5 54.1% TS

Which player is better in the playoffs?

eFG is significantly closer. And 54.1 vs 58.4 is only a 7.9% difference, which would be the same percentage difference as 26ppg vs 28ppg. We really gonna split hairs over such a minute difference?

Anyway, I'd take Kobe for his career. There is more to the game than scoring the ball, and Kobe defended his position much better than Dirk did his.

[TonyMontana]

I know you can't be argued with, but for once I"ll actually take the bait.

First of all, I"ll be the first to tell you that Kobe is not on Jordan's level. He is second among SGs, though.

Second, both Jordan, and Kobe, make/made their teammates better. They do so by taking the scoring burden/pressure off of them, by getting double- and triple-teamed and (sometimes) passing out of it, to an (theoretically) open teammate.

Third, Kobe was once a first rate defender (again, not on Jordan's level, but 100% a 1st team candidate). I can't think of many perimeter players his age (34? 35?) that were still top-notch defenders, so I won't hold his current lack of defensive ability against him.

Fourth, Kobe has, whether through his own actions or not, dealt with more team turmoil/turnover than most of the other GOAT/top 10 candidates. A few exceptions include: Wilt, Kareem, Shaq. The vast majority of the "greatest ever" players had incredibly stability in terms of supporting cast, coaching, and team. Minor point? Perhaps, but when nit-picking all time greats, it's a factor to consider.

Fifth, Kobe is not an efficient scorer. He may not be the most efficient, but he is not inefficient. Using eFG or TS, he is actually quite efficient.

Lastly... combine his very good efficiency with elite level playmaking, scoring, passing, defending, along with his longevity, and career accomplishments, plus the non-quantifiable "wow" and "fear" factors... and he most certainly has a case for top 10 all time, though he's by no means a sure thing.

Im not going to argue Kobes place among "SGs"

Guards are overated to begin with and dont impact the game as much as bigs.

LeBron, Bird, Magic are elite because they can dominate the game scoring, they have the size to rebound in double digits, and they also are three of the very best passers in NBA History. They make guys better.

Jordan like we've established is a richmans version of Kobe, better in every way(except maybe three point shooting). Best scorer in NBA History.

Kobes impact when compared to the centers and these other guys just doesn't compare. He doesn't belong.

[boozehound]

I dont think he is, but I also think its ridiculous to argue this dumb shit. Who cares if there were 20 players better than him in the league or 5?

[boozehound]

eFG is significantly closer. And 54.1 vs 58.4 is only a 7.9% difference, which would be the same percentage difference as 26ppg vs 28ppg. We really gonna split hairs over such a minute difference?

Anyway, I'd take Kobe for his career. There is more to the game than scoring the ball, and Kobe defended his position much better than Dirk did his.
3.9 you mean? Its still a pretty ****ing big difference

[TonyMontana]

Hakeem's team was knocked out of the playoffs in the first round 9 times in his career. He only had 6 playoff runs that were at least 10 games, and only 3 Finals appearances. Meaning a large portion of his playoff stats are first round or second round series. Compared to Kobe who has 7 Finals runs and has had a playoff run less than 10 games only 4 times in his career.

I wonder how many playoff runs of 10+ games Kobe would have had without Shaq or the best frontcourt in the league.

Based on our sample size from 2005-2007 I have come up with....0!

:oldlol:

[ZaaaaaH]

Im not going to argue Kobes place among "SGs"

Guards are overated to begin with and dont impact the game as much as bigs.

LeBron, Bird, Magic are elite because they can dominate the game scoring, they have the size to rebound in double digits, and they also are three of the very best passers in NBA History. They make guys better.

Jordan like we've established is a richmans version of Kobe, better in every way(except maybe three point shooting). Best scorer in NBA History.

Kobes impact when compared to the centers and these other guys just doesn't compare. He doesn't belong.

Tony just knows so much about Kobe and Basketball :lol

[rhythmic]

Im not going to argue Kobes place among "SGs"

Guards are overated to begin with and dont impact the game as much as bigs.

LeBron, Bird, Magic are elite because they can dominate the game scoring, they have the size to rebound in double digits, and they also are three of the very best passers in NBA History. They make guys better.

Jordan like we've established is a richmans version of Kobe, better in every way(except maybe three point shooting). Best scorer in NBA History.

Kobes impact when compared to the centers and these other guys just doesn't compare. He doesn't belong.

Funny, especially considering how badly Kobe has spanked Duncan throughout his career. Funny, I thought Duncan's impact is greater?

Pretty sure even in 2001, when Shaq was on the team...Kobe gave both Robinson & Duncan the business. Two of the best bigs of all-time. :rolleyes:

[DMAVS41]

Hakeem's team was knocked out of the playoffs in the first round 9 times in his career. He only had 6 playoff runs that were at least 10 games, and only 3 Finals appearances. Meaning a large portion of his playoff stats are first round or second round series. Compared to Kobe who has 7 Finals runs and has had a playoff run less than 10 games only 4 times in his career. Plus Kobe was not a starter for 20 of his 220 playoff games, while Hakeem was not a starter for only 5 of his 146 playoff games. It's like you comparing Kobe's playoff stats to Dirk's, who are misleading as well since his teams have not gone as deep as much as Kobe's too.

Kobe's playoff stats as a starter:
27.4 PPG / 5.4 RPG / 5.1 APG / 1.5 SPG / 45% FG / 34% 3PT / 82% FT / 54% TS in 200 games

How are Dirk's stats misleading? He did what he did...it was his teams holding him back virtually every year of his career.

All you are doing is crediting Kobe hugely with having the fortune of playing on much better teams and with much better coaches than Hakeem and Dirk.

Seems unfair to me.:confusedshrug:

[DMAVS41]

eFG is significantly closer. And 54.1 vs 58.4 is only a 7.9% difference, which would be the same percentage difference as 26ppg vs 28ppg. We really gonna split hairs over such a minute difference?

Anyway, I'd take Kobe for his career. There is more to the game than scoring the ball, and Kobe defended his position much better than Dirk did his.

I don't know what this means. Dirk scored a similar amount of ppg with more attention on him and did so at a significant better efficiency number overall.

Sorry, 4.3% TS difference is quite large.

[TonyMontana]

[QUOTE=rhythmic

[pudman13]

Watch Bird at 12:40. Kobe would never do this:

http://youtu.be/R_qbVeNELpc?t=12m30s

[Deuce Bigalow]

How are Dirk's stats misleading? He did what he did...it was his teams holding him back virtually every year of his career.

All you are doing is crediting Kobe hugely with having the fortune of playing on much better teams and with much better coaches than Hakeem and Dirk.

Seems unfair to me.:confusedshrug:
I'm not blaming them for losing earlier. Hakeem is the better player probably, actually more like he is. Kobe is still ahead of him though because of the rings. Dirk is obviously not better than Kobe, but his playoff stats are great. I think that Dirk's numbers would go down if his team advanced deep and played San Antonio, Philadelphia, New Jersey, and Detroit in '00-05.

[Legends66NBA7]

Watch Bird at 12:40. Kobe would never do this:

http://youtu.be/R_qbVeNELpc?t=12m30s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiGyQTcXL48

[riseagainst]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiGyQTcXL48

:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

[SilkkTheShocker]

I wonder how many playoff runs of 10+ games Kobe would have had without Shaq or the best frontcourt in the league.

Based on our sample size from 2005-2007 I have come up with....0!

:oldlol:

/Thread :oldlol:

[pudman13]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiGyQTcXL48

OK, good play, but still not quite the same. Bird was absolutely wide open and the shot he created wasn't a guarantee. Kobe gave up his own contested shot to make a flashy (if easy) play.

Close enough maybe you prove your point, but there's a different level of "getting your team involved" in those two plays.

[rhythmic]

You mean when Kobe beat him with Prime Shaq on his team?

Or when Kobe beat him with the most stacked team in the conference in 2008?

When Kobe significantly outplayed Duncan, Robinson & Shaquille in the 2001 WCF, sweeping the Spurs in the most humiliating fashion in history (to this day, the 20 point differential is the largest deficit in NBA playoffs history). :oldlol:

And before you doubt me clown, take a look:

Shaq:
28 points, 11 rebounds, 2 assists (50%) Gm1
19 points, 14 rebounds, 4 assists (38%) Gm2
35 points, 17 rebounds, 3 assists (70%) Gm3
26 points, 10 rebounds, 1 assist (58%) Gm4

27 PPG, 13 RPG, 2.5 APG - 54%

Kobe:
45 points, 10 rebounds, 3 assists (54%) Gm1
28 points, 7 rebounds, 6 assists (48%) Gm2
36 points, 9 rebounds, 8 assists (52%) Gm3
24 points, 2 rebounds, 11 assists (53%) Gm4

33.25 PPG, 7 RPG, 7 APG - 51%

Duncan:
28 points, 14 rebounds, 6 assists (53%) Gm1
40 points, 15 rebounds, 3 assists (58%) Gm1
9 points, 13 rebounds, 7 assists (21%) Gm3 :roll:
15 points, 7 rebounds, 1 assist (50%) Gm4

23 PPG, 12.25 RPG, 4.25 APG - 48%

Clearly Kobe was the best player in the series, especially considering how badly Shaq struggled in that 2nd game. Not to mention when the game was at 80-78 LA; Kobe took over, dishing a beautiful pass to Shaq for a bucket and next play draining a big 3 to extend the lead to 85-78. :applause:


In 2008, Kobe had Pau Gasol, Lamar Odom & Trevor Ariza. :lol
Yeah the most "stacked" supporting cast ever buddy.

[DMAVS41]

I'm not blaming them for losing earlier. Hakeem is the better player probably, actually more like he is. Kobe is still ahead of him though because of the rings. Dirk is obviously not better than Kobe, but his playoff stats are great. I think that Dirk's numbers would go down if his team advanced deep and played San Antonio, Philadelphia, New Jersey, and Detroit in '00-05.

Why? You should check Dirk's numbers vs the Spurs in 06 when they were essentially at the peak of their powers...losing only 1 series in 3 years...to
Dirk and the Mavs;

20/14/2
21/9/1
27/15/3
28/9/3
31/10/4
26/21/5
37/15/3

Just don't think you have much to stand on here mate.

[kshutts1]

I don't know what this means. Dirk scored a similar amount of ppg with more attention on him and did so at a significant better efficiency number overall.

Sorry, 4.3% TS difference is quite large.

First one... really? More attention?

Second... I don't view that % as "quite large" but to each their own, obviously.

[Legends66NBA7]

OK, good play, but still not quite the same. Bird was absolutely wide open and the shot he created wasn't a guarantee. Kobe gave up his own contested shot to make a flashy (if easy) play.

Close enough maybe you prove your point, but there's a different level of "getting your team involved" in those two plays.

Well, it would be more difficult to find an exact replica of that Bird play. I have seen Bryant make transition passes when he was open, but I get your point too. Although, that's certainly not an easy pass. Infact, I think that was tougher to pull off or Dwight just made the conversion easier because of his athletic ability.

In terms of play making and getting other more involved, Bird is better. Don't think that needs to be debated. Bryant does have the ability (which explains my selection of that clip) but like you mentioned, a different approach.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Why? You should check Dirk's numbers vs the Spurs in 06 when they were essentially at the peak of their powers...losing only 1 series in 3 years...to
Dirk and the Mavs;

20/14/2
21/9/1
27/15/3
28/9/3
31/10/4
26/21/5
37/15/3

Just don't think you have much to stand on here mate.
From a thread a made a while ago - http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=289060

Kobe has played a team that had a DRTG of less than 100 13 times in the playoffs. How many has Dirk played? Use this to find out - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0Aoy3YD7IdypTdGJZdVI5X0dySzNJWm51NkZ2UU1sSl E

[TonyMontana]

[QUOTE=rhythmic

[pudman13]

Well, it would be more difficult to find an exact replica of that Bird play. I have seen Bryant make transition passes when he was open, but I get your point too. Although, that's certainly not an easy pass. Infact, I think that was tougher to pull off or Dwight just made the conversion easier because of his athletic ability.

In terms of play making and getting other more involved, Bird is better. Don't think that needs to be debated. Bryant does have the ability (which explains my selection of that clip) but like you mentioned, a different approach.

Yeah, I won't disagree with that. Kobe's a complicated guy. I tend to think that in terms of actual ability & work ethic he's up there with anyone. It's also fair to say that the game has changed and any of the comparisons we're making can be argued down in some way or other.

[DMAVS41]

First one... really? More attention?

Second... I don't view that % as "quite large" but to each their own, obviously.

The first one. It's a bit tongue and cheek obviously, just pointing out the excuse for Kobe about his facing so much attention is kind of lame. He's had great teams with excellent players virtually his entire career. Dirk has certainly had to carry a bigger burden...especially in elimination games and game 7's. But I'd say Kobe's facing of tougher teams is more than made even by Dirk having less help and worse coaching most of his career. And again...there is no evidence that Dirk gets worse against better defensive teams. Arguably his best series ever came against the 06 Spurs...a team with the best defense in the league.

A 4.3% difference is TS is very large. That isn't a matter of opinion...it's just a fact.

Edit:

Nevermind...you were going off of series. But in the series that I did look at...Dirk was really good. Like against the 03 Kings...defensive rating of 99. Dirk had a 30/19/2 69% TS game 7.

[NumberSix]

The first one. It's a bit tongue and cheek obviously, just pointing out the excuse for Kobe about his facing so much attention is kind of lame. He's had great teams with excellent players virtually his entire career. Dirk has certainly had to carry a bigger burden...especially in elimination games and game 7's.

A 4.3% difference is TS is very large. That isn't a matter of opinion...it's just a fact.
You mean "tongue IN cheek". "Tongue AND cheek" would have literally no meaning.

[kshutts1]

The first one. It's a bit tongue and cheek obviously, just pointing out the excuse for Kobe about his facing so much attention is kind of lame. He's had great teams with excellent players virtually his entire career. Dirk has certainly had to carry a bigger burden...especially in elimination games and game 7's. But I'd say Kobe's facing of tougher teams is more than made even by Dirk having less help and worse coaching most of his career. And again...there is no evidence that Dirk gets worse against better defensive teams. Arguably his best series ever came against the 06 Spurs...a team with the best defense in the league. That series alone puts Dirk at 7 games against a team with a sub 100 defensive rating in the playoffs. So actually on that metric...again your point holds no water. Dirk has played less playoff games...therefore a similar or perhaps higher percentage of his games have come against sub 100 defensive rated teams.

A 4.3% difference is TS is very large. That isn't a matter of opinion...it's just a fact.

Edit:

Already up to 10 Dirk games against sub 100 defensive rated teams. Therefore Dirk actually plays a higher percentage of playoff games against these types of defenses than Kobe does. LOL
Bear with me here... I'm gonna try something, and see if it works.

Dirk's 08-09 season:
FGA/gm - 20.0
TS% - .564
PPG - 25.9

Kobe's 01-02 season:
FGA/gm - 20.0
TS% - .544 (.02 less than Dirk)
PPG - 25.2 (.7 less than Dirk)

Now, here's where I try something...

Identical per game shot count. 2% different in TS is equal to a .7 ppg difference. We are discussing a 4.3% difference. 4.3/2 = 2.15. So multiply the difference in ppg by 2.15 and we come up with... 1.505.

So, if the number gymnastics actually work, that means that, with 20 shots a game, a TS% difference of 4.3 is equivalent to one player averaging
25.9
and the other player averaging
24.5

I'm sorry, but in my mind that hardly qualifies as a "factual" "very large" difference.

[DMAVS41]

You mean "tongue IN cheek". "Tongue AND cheek" would have literally no meaning.

haha. yes. thank you for pointing out such a crucial error.

[DMAVS41]

Bear with me here... I'm gonna try something, and see if it works.

Dirk's 08-09 season:
FGA/gm - 20.0
TS% - .564
PPG - 25.9

Kobe's 01-02 season:
FGA/gm - 20.0
TS% - .544 (.02 less than Dirk)
PPG - 25.2 (.7 less than Dirk)

Now, here's where I try something...

Identical per game shot count. 2% different in TS is equal to a .7 ppg difference. We are discussing a 4.3% difference. 4.3/2 = 2.15. So multiply the difference in ppg by 2.15 and we come up with... 1.505.

So, if the number gymnastics actually work, that means that, with 20 shots a game, a TS% difference of 4.3 is equivalent to one player averaging
25.9
and the other player averaging
24.5

I'm sorry, but in my mind that hardly qualifies as a "factual" "very large" difference.

That isn't how you do a true statistical analysis, but even on that...a player scoring 1.5 more ppg on the same number of possessions used is a big difference in my opinion. And you left out ft attempts. If Kobe took more...which I'm sure he did...he's using up another possession or at least part of a possession by taking more free throws.

[NumberSix]

That isn't how you do a true statistical analysis, but even on that...a player scoring 1.5 more ppg on the same number of possessions used is a big difference in my opinion.
In a sport where games are routinely decided by a team making 1 more basket, its actually huge.

[DMAVS41]

In a sport where games are routinely decided by a team making 1 more basket, its actually huge.

Exactly.

[kshutts1]

That isn't how you do a true statistical analysis, but even on that...a player scoring 1.5 more ppg on the same number of possessions used is a big difference in my opinion.
Sure you didn't mean to say "factually speaking"? :roll:

Sorry, had to.

Anyway, I never said 'possessions used', I just went on shots per game vs TS%. Using that metric, Kobe would probably look even worse than he does now, as I imagine his turnovers are higher, and I believe those account for possessions used. :lol

But I don't view things from a max/min point of view. Would I rather have that extra 1.5 ppg? Of course. But am I gonna hold it against a player? To a very small extent, of course I will. But I'm not gonna haggle over such a relatively small technicality.

[DMAVS41]

Sure you didn't mean to say "factually speaking"? :roll:

Sorry, had to.

Anyway, I never said 'possessions used', I just went on shots per game vs TS%. Using that metric, Kobe would probably look even worse than he does now, as I imagine his turnovers are higher, and I believe those account for possessions used. :lol

But I don't view things from a max/min point of view. Would I rather have that extra 1.5 ppg? Of course. But am I gonna hold it against a player? To a very small extent, of course I will. But I'm not gonna haggle over such a relatively small technicality.

But how far do you take this then?

So how important is it that Kobe is more efficient than Iverson. I would imagine Kobe to be roughly 5% better in terms of TS...does that not matter?

When you look at it in the very simplistic view you have created...you can just keep going back and back and back...to where Iverson and Kobe is a wash. And I doubt you agree with that.

Also, when doing a statistical analysis like this. You have to talk about it this way;

Games over 65% TS
Games over 60% TS
Games over 55% TS
Games over 50% TS
Games under 50% TS
Games under 45% TS

That kind of analysis is better and more accurate because it shows the actual data points and not just the average...because players don't play to their average every single night.

[Jameerthefear]

Seriously I think you'd get your ass kicked irl if you said some of the shit Tony says on here. Talk to most people on the street and they will say yes. Talk to former NBA players, they say yes, but some guy on ISH's opinion apparently holds more merit :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Le Shaqtus]

Seriously I think you'd get your ass kicked irl if you said some of the shit Tony says on here. Talk to most people on the street and they will say yes. Talk to former NBA players, they say yes, but some guy on ISH's opinion apparently holds more merit :roll: :roll: :roll:

You wouldn't catch that dude saying any of that dumb shit the way he says it on here in real life, why do you think no one besides LeBron stans take him seriously here :facepalm

[kshutts1]

But how far do you take this then?

So how important is it that Kobe is more efficient than Iverson. I would imagine Kobe to be roughly 5% better in terms of TS...does that not matter?

When you look at it in the very simplistic view you have created...you can just keep going back and back and back...to where Iverson and Kobe is a wash. And I doubt you agree with that.

Also, when doing a statistical analysis like this. You have to talk about it this way;

Games over 65% TS
Games over 60% TS
Games over 55% TS
Games over 50% TS
Games under 50% TS
Games under 45% TS

That kind of analysis is better and more accurate because it shows the actual data points and not just the average...because players don't play to their average every single night.

That is a very good point, and there does need to be a "measuring stick". I was just pointing out why I don't consider it a large gap. Though to be fair to Iverson, he does somewhat well with the TS measurement, and "chucker" label or not, he was a fabulous scorer.

Regardless of how anyone views Iverson, what you said is a good point, and I don't have a quick answer for that, but off the top of my head I would probably use some sort of "league average" baseline value system.

[DMAVS41]

That is a very good point, and there does need to be a "measuring stick". I was just pointing out why I don't consider it a large gap. Though to be fair to Iverson, he does somewhat well with the TS measurement, and "chucker" label or not, he was a fabulous scorer.

Regardless of how anyone views Iverson, what you said is a good point, and I don't have a quick answer for that, but off the top of my head I would probably use some sort of "league average" baseline value system.

I know; but here is my point if that gap just means very little

26/5/5 54.1% TS

30/4/6 48.9% TS

Of course stats aren't the end all be all, but I'm not sure Kobe is better than Iverson if you say efficiency is essentially meaningless. That is the main thing Kobe has over him actually.

[kshutts1]

I know; but here is my point if that gap just means very little

26/5/5 54.1% TS

30/4/6 48.9% TS

Of course stats aren't the end all be all, but I'm not sure Kobe is better than Iverson if you say efficiency is essentially meaningless. That is the main thing Kobe has over him actually.
Are we still talking about only scoring? Because Iverson has a case if we are talking scoring.

If talking overall basketball, defense is the main thing Kobe has over him; efficiency is second.

[DMAVS41]

Are we still talking about only scoring? Because Iverson has a case if we are talking scoring.

If talking overall basketball, defense is the main thing Kobe has over him; efficiency is second.

But see. This is my point. You bring up defense. Quantify that. Where is that actual defensive impact Kobe is making as a guard;

http://asubstituteforwar.wordpress.com/2011/05/09/kobe-bryant-the-most-overrated-defender-imaginable/

How many points is it worth a game? What if I take your approach and say..."meh...it's only worth maybe 1 point a game"...so it's no big deal. You see the slippery slope you've created?

[kshutts1]

But see. This is my point. You bring up defense. Quantify that. Where is that actual defensive impact Kobe is making as a guard;

http://asubstituteforwar.wordpress.com/2011/05/09/kobe-bryant-the-most-overrated-defender-imaginable/

How many points is it worth a game? What if I take your approach and say..."meh...it's only worth maybe 1 point a game"...so it's no big deal. You see the slippery slope you've created?
I agreed with you on my earlier point, but this is definitely taking it a step too far, lol.

[DMAVS41]

I agreed with you on my earlier point, but this is definitely taking it a step too far, lol.

Why? Guards generally have little impact defensively to begin with...and Iverson was actually a good defender. Not like he was Nash or something.

[kshutts1]

Why? Guards generally have little impact defensively to begin with...and Iverson was actually a good defender. Not like he was Nash or something.

Because I showed you a "fact" that it was "only" 1.5 ppg.
Iverson got a lot of steals, he was not a good defender.

However, if there was a way to quantify defense, and Iverson was "only a point a game" worse than Kobe, then that would DRASTICALLY alter my tiered ranking system.

[DMAVS41]

Because I showed you a "fact" that it was "only" 1.5 ppg.
Iverson got a lot of steals, he was not a good defender.

However, if there was a way to quantify defense, and Iverson was "only a point a game" worse than Kobe, then that would DRASTICALLY alter my tiered ranking system.

I actually think Iverson was a good defender. And we all know guards simply don't have a huge impact on defense to begin with. Well...a guy like MJ did, but Kobe isn't on that level...as evidenced by the evidence I presented you with on how over-rated Kobe's impact on defense really has been.

How many ppg does iverson cause his team to give up more than Kobe does in your opinion?

[kshutts1]

I actually think Iverson was a good defender. And we all know guards simply don't have a huge impact on defense to begin with. Well...a guy like MJ did, but Kobe isn't on that level...as evidenced by the evidence I presented you with on how over-rated Kobe's impact on defense really has been.

How many ppg does iverson cause his team to give up more than Kobe does in your opinion?

I did a really quick "break down" of impact on offense vs defense (people claiming great O is obviously better than great D), and it went something like this (was used with a big man)...

Elmore Smith has the NBA record for blocks in a game with 17. That's 34 points saved, assuming he blocked only 2pt shots.
I don't know how many rebounds he had, but every defensive rebound also took away the possession from the offensive team, thus taking away their ability to score. We'll say 7 defensive rebounds just for arguments sake. That's 7 points saved (not sure on offensive efficiency of an average NBA team, but we'll save a point per possession for ease).

Then on to the harder-to-quantify areas... How many prospective shooters decide against it in the face of Elmore's long reach? How many post up opportunities did he prevent? How many did he defend adequately? How many shots were missed because of his defense?

We already accounted for 41 pts, then taking into account all the other "HtQ" areas, what are we up to? 50? 55? And another "HtQ" that I haven't mentioned is how many times did the defense purposefully play away from Smith? Not throw the ball to a post player with good position, because they feared the outcome would be negative? etc.

We can apply a lot of these points to Kobe's defense, particularly the last one (playing away from a strong defender), and add in the fact that Kobe often defends players on the perimeter, the ones that initiate the offense or create for others... what does his 1-on-1 defense mean for his team as opposed to having to double said offensive player if it were not such a strong defender playing?

I can go on and on, but my girlfriend is glaring at me to go for a run.

[DMAVS41]

I did a really quick "break down" of impact on offense vs defense (people claiming great O is obviously better than great D), and it went something like this (was used with a big man)...

Elmore Smith has the NBA record for blocks in a game with 17. That's 34 points saved, assuming he blocked only 2pt shots.
I don't know how many rebounds he had, but every defensive rebound also took away the possession from the offensive team, thus taking away their ability to score. We'll say 7 defensive rebounds just for arguments sake. That's 7 points saved (not sure on offensive efficiency of an average NBA team, but we'll save a point per possession for ease).

Then on to the harder-to-quantify areas... How many prospective shooters decide against it in the face of Elmore's long reach? How many post up opportunities did he prevent? How many did he defend adequately? How many shots were missed because of his defense?

We already accounted for 41 pts, then taking into account all the other "HtQ" areas, what are we up to? 50? 55? And another "HtQ" that I haven't mentioned is how many times did the defense purposefully play away from Smith? Not throw the ball to a post player with good position, because they feared the outcome would be negative? etc.

We can apply a lot of these points to Kobe's defense, particularly the last one (playing away from a strong defender), and add in the fact that Kobe often defends players on the perimeter, the ones that initiate the offense or create for others... what does his 1-on-1 defense mean for his team as opposed to having to double said offensive player if it were not such a strong defender playing?

I can go on and on, but my girlfriend is glaring at me to go for a run.

Great offense individually is clearly more valuable than great defense individually.

We have already proven this time and time again on the superstar level.

I'm more talking about how would the Lakers, for example, do in terms of giving up more points with an average defender at sg instead of Kobe. You can look at defensive plus minus...on/off...stats...etc. That is what I'm talking about.

And in terms of 100 possessions...my guess is that you just aren't going to see much of a difference on your view.

[TheWalkman]

no

/thread

[kshutts1]

Great offense individually is clearly more valuable than great defense individually.

We have already proven this time and time again on the superstar level.

I'm more talking about how would the Lakers, for example, do in terms of giving up more points with an average defender at sg instead of Kobe. You can look at defensive plus minus...on/off...stats...etc. That is what I'm talking about.

And in terms of 100 possessions...my guess is that you just aren't going to see much of a difference on your view.

I don't know where to find such stats, or what they take in to account. But it would be nice to see an "average" defensive rating, know what it means in quantifiable terms, and then be able to get a listing of individual players' ratings.

[Nevaeh]

Tony just knows so much about Kobe and Basketball :lol

http://cdn.cosbysweaters.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/20110626143746Scarfaceinthefall.jpg

"He came to America for the money, the power, and the women. He stayed in America for the basketball".

:oldlol:

In Tony's defense though, the stats he's posting can easily be pulled up, right off the Internet. The days of "extensive research" are pretty much over for anybody who can use a search engine. Good thread guys.

[TheMilkyBarKid]

He's around the 9-12 mark for me

[2010splash]

All I can say is that Kobe has never shown the all-around dominance of a LeBron, Jordan, Shaq or some of the great bigs of the past. Kobe stans often resort to using "number of all-star game appearances" and "all-star game MVPs" to back up any argument of Kobe being higher than 10th best.:roll:

When you only win 1 MVP, you ain't dominant enough to be compared to the top 5-8 greats. Kobe has never been clearly better than his competition. Even when he won MVP he was not better than LeBron and many think Paul had a better year too.

[chazzy]

Yes

[Jacks3]

indisputable top 10 player of all-time.

[funnystuff]

I have Kobe at 11, and without Gasol he'd sit at about #22 with 0 FMVPs.

[Jacks3]

the same pau who is 0-16 without bryant? :oldlol:

[BallsOut]

1)Jordan
2)Russell
3)Kareem
4)Magic
5)Bird
6)Wilt
7)Kobe
8)Duncan
9)Shaq
10)Hakeem

[funnystuff]

the same pau who is 0-16 without bryant? :oldlol:
Be happy your favorite player is at #11. Thats pretty high up there. :cheers:

[zoom17]

All I can say is that Kobe has never shown the all-around dominance of a LeBron, Jordan, Shaq or some of the great bigs of the past. Kobe stans often resort to using "number of all-star game appearances" and "all-star game MVPs" to back up any argument of Kobe being higher than 10th best.:roll:

When you only win 1 MVP, you ain't dominant enough to be compared to the top 5-8 greats. Kobe has never been clearly better than his competition. Even when he won MVP he was not better than LeBron and many think Paul had a better year too.

This

[Magic 32]

When you only win 1 MVP, you ain't dominant enough to be compared to the top 5-8 greats.

http://gifninja.com/animatedgifs/52471/dr-shaq.gif

[zoom17]

http://gifninja.com/animatedgifs/52471/dr-shaq.gif

Its the truth kobe aint top 10