Who was more skilled at 22? Lebron in 2007 or Kobe in 2001?

[NBAplayoffs2001]

Both of them had great playoffs even though Lebron lost in the finals leading a team as the 1st option even if it was a very weak eastern conference to the finals is always impressive at 22.

Kobe exploded in the WCF shooting 51% and averaging around 31/7/6 but didn't have a great finals.

So ignoring the NBA finals for both players, which showed more skill?

Not trying to create a flame thread on either player, I think this is a very interesting comparison.

[La Frescobaldi]

Bryant.

[9erempiree]

Kobe was already an elite two way player by then.

Lebron still had that shaky jumper and poor defense.

[WeGetRing2012]

Kobe by far.

[kamil]

Kobe was already an elite two way player by then.

Lebron still had that shaky jumper and poor defense.

Kobe's defense has never been as great as some Kobe stans make it out to be.

[moe94]

Kobe's defense has never been as great as some Kobe stans make it out to be.

According to all defensive teams, he's top 3 perimeter defender of all time, at least. So it's not just the stans.

[Harison]

Kobe was always more skilled than Lebron, however the latter is a bigger freak of nature and more impactfull in his prime than Kobe ever was.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

By 2001, Kobe was a more skilled scorer than Lebron...ever has been.

As dominant/efficient is another story

[ArbitraryWater]

What da fak kinda question is this? :lol

Of course Kobe..

Kobetards making little progress here :oldlol:

[Dragonyeuw]

Kobe more skilled. Lebron's game at 22 was heavily skewed towards his athleticism over skill.

[J Shuttlesworth]

Kobe was always more skilled than Lebron, however the latter is a bigger freak of nature and more impactfull in his prime than Kobe ever was.
This.

Kobe = better footwork, better jumper

But skill doesn't always trump athleticism

[Dragonyeuw]

This.

Kobe = better footwork, better jumper

But skill doesn't always trump athleticism

Perhaps not, by its not like Kobe was some slouch athletically. Also, skill will always outlast athleticism 100% of the time. Its why a 38 year old Tim Duncan is still a top big man after 17 years and still being a solid contributor on a championship team.

[J Shuttlesworth]

Perhaps not, by its not like Kobe was some slouch athletically. Also, skill will always outlast athleticism 100% of the time. Its why a 38 year old Tim Duncan is still a top big man after 17 years and still being a solid contributor on a championship team.
Skill can give you longevity, no doubt, but being in great shape can also help your longevity over time. LeBron's muscle will help him be a post threat when he's older, and he's also working on his jumper constantly which will help him when he's older. I don't think Duncan would be a top big man if this were the 90s though where we had elite/athletic big men (Ewing/Olajuwon,etc)

Just look at it this way. LeBron doesn't have the skill that Kobe has, but his athleticism has led him to be arguably a better player in his prime than Kobe. The athleticism has helped him get better numbers, but in a completely different fashion than Kobe.

[dubeta]

LeBron is more skilled

Kirby relys on athletiism

[Dragonyeuw]

Skill can give you longevity, no doubt, but being in great shape can also help your longevity over time. LeBron's muscle will help him be a post threat when he's older, and he's also working on his jumper constantly which will help him when he's older. I don't think Duncan would be a top big man if this were the 90s though where we had elite/athletic big men (Ewing/Olajuwon,etc)

Just look at it this way. LeBron doesn't have the skill that Kobe has, but his athleticism has led him to be arguably a better player in his prime than Kobe. The athleticism has helped him get better numbers, but in a completely different fashion than Kobe.

Kobe hasn't been in great shape with amazing longevity? Kobe's prime was from 2001-2010, and even as recently as 2013 was still top 3/4 until the tendon injury....at 34 after 16 seasons. He's known for his conditioning and work ethic. Also, Kobe has been operating more and more out of the post since hitting 30, and won two titles that way. He didn't need excess bulk to operate from the post, just fundamentals/footwork/ and a deft shooting touch.

[J Shuttlesworth]

Kobe hasn't been in great shape with amazing longevity? Kobe's prime was from 2011-2010, and even as recently as 2013 was still top 3/4 until the tendon injury....at 34 after 16 seasons. He's known for his conditioning and work ethic. Also, Kobe has been operating more and more out of the post since hitting 30, and won two titles that way. He didn't need excess bulk to operate from the post, just fundamentals/footwork/ and a deft shooting touch.
You seem to be implying that I said Kobe is a slouch athletically... which I never said. He obviously isn't the athlete LeBron is, but he's obviously athletic/skilled enough to have a long lasting career. LeBron's athleticism allows him to get easier looks at the rim than Kobe does, hence the higher FG%. He's also a better catch/shoot player (not related to athleticism though, besides maybe the agility to get away from your defender off ball).

If you're talking Kobe vs. Vince Carter, obviously Kobe's skill trumps Vince Carter's athleticism... but when you compare Kobe to a guy like LeBron who has a much harder work ethic/b-ball IQ than Vince Carter, Kobe's skill doesn't trump him.

[allball]

they were both great to watch at 22. skillwise I would give Kobe a slight edge.

[Dragonyeuw]

You seem to be implying that I said Kobe is a slouch athletically... which I never said. He obviously isn't the athlete LeBron is, but he's obviously athletic/skilled enough to have a long lasting career. LeBron's athleticism allows him to get easier looks at the rim than Kobe does, hence the higher FG%. He's also a better catch/shoot player (not related to athleticism though, besides maybe the agility to get away from your defender off ball).

If you're talking Kobe vs. Vince Carter, obviously Kobe's skill trumps Vince Carter's athleticism... but when you compare Kobe to a guy like LeBron who has a much harder work ethic/b-ball IQ than Vince Carter, Kobe's skill doesn't trump him.

At the end of the day, the question is who was more skilled at 22. The answer was, is, and will be Kobe. I'm not sure why athleticism has entered the discussion.

[Milbuck]

Kobe: 29/6/5/2/1 on 55% TS

Lebron: 27/7/6/2/1 on 55% TS

I think Kobe has the edge in skills, which is the topic of discussion, while Lebron has the advantage physically. I'd give Kobe a slight edge overall.

[Quickening]

Lots of players are skilled who can't even get near the nba. Kobe has always been more skilled, but Lebron has always been the more dominant/better basketball player due to a mixture of superior athleticsm and IQ.

[J Shuttlesworth]

At the end of the day, the question is who was more skilled at 22. The answer was, is, and will be Kobe. I'm not sure why athleticism has entered the discussion.
I never disagreed Kobe has always been the more skilled player. I don't think a skilled player necessarily means the better player though due to athleticism

[K Xerxes]

I usually side with Bron in these discussions, but 2001 Kobe was better than 2007 Bron. Offensively they had fairly similar outputs, but Kobe was already a very good defender by then. Bron didn't focus on improving his defense to elite level until 2009.

Honestly 2001 Kobe was so so so good. Dude dominated the WC playoffs and arguably was more impactful than ****ing peak Shaq until the finals. It wasn't his peak as a player, but as far as performances go... it's arguably as good as we've seen from him.

Skillwise edge goes to Kobe, though that Kobe was just unreal athletically. I wish we could see him again. :bowdown:

[Dragonyeuw]

I never disagreed Kobe has always been the more skilled player. I don't think a skilled player necessarily means the better player though due to athleticism

Thats cool, but whether skill translates to a better player than a superior athlete is a separate matter. Again the question is 'who was the more skilled at 22', not 'does being more skilled equate to necessarily being a better player'? Better, of course, being a completely subjective argument but then again, 'skill' can be subjective too. I think a simple eye test will show that Kobe was more polished at 22 in terms of fundamentals and skillset. Also I can better appreciate a player who worked themselves to greatness and dominates through skill, more than someone who is genetically superior but that's also another topic.

[Dragonyeuw]

I usually side with Bron in these discussions, but 2001 Kobe was better than 2007 Bron. Offensively they had fairly similar outputs, but Kobe was already a very good defender by then. Bron didn't focus on improving his defense to elite level until 2009.

Honestly 2001 Kobe was so so so good. Dude dominated the WC playoffs and arguably was more impactful than ****ing peak Shaq until the finals. It wasn't his peak as a player, but as far as performances go... it's arguably as good as we've seen from him.

Skillwise edge goes to Kobe, though that Kobe was just unreal athletically. I wish we could see him again. :bowdown:

Kobe played out of his mind in that 2001 playoffs. Didn't he have like two 45+ points/15+ rebound games in that Spurs series? I still think, given the competition, that was Kobe's best overall playoff run even if he hadn't peaked yet. But the same token, I consider his 2003 year his best across the board even though many people like to point to his 2006 season.

[Milbuck]

Kobe played out of his mind in that 2001 playoffs. Didn't he have like two 45+ points/15+ rebound games in that Spurs series? I still think, given the competition, that was Kobe's best overall playoff run even if he hadn't peaked yet. But the same token, I consider his 2003 year his best across the board even though many people like to point to his 2006 season.
He did have similar games back to back, but they overlapped series. They swept C-Webb's Kings in the 2nd round, and Duncan's Spurs in the conference finals. He had a 48/16 game in game 4 against Sacramento, 45/10 in game 1 against San Antonio, back to back. Averaged 33/7/7/2/1 on 57% TS against the Spurs in the conference finals.

I agree with your point on 2001 and 2003 having a strong case for his best seasons. That Kobe found the perfect balance offensively and defensively, athletically and skill wise. 2006 was his most dominant season in terms of scoring, while 2008 was his best season as far as leadership/experience/intelligence is concerned, but he was a much more complete basketball player in 2001 and 2003.

[Dragonyeuw]

I agree with your point on 2001 and 2003 having a strong case for his best seasons. That Kobe found the perfect balance offensively and defensively, athletically and skill wise. 2006 was his most dominant season in terms of scoring, while 2008 was his best season as far as leadership/experience/intelligence is concerned, but he was a much more complete basketball player in 2001 and 2003.

:cheers: yep, well said on all accounts.

[knicksman]

the one who can destroy prime spurs instead of getting shut down. Hell lebron was shutdown in his prime. :lol

[CavaliersFTW]

Kobe was already an elite two way player by then.

Lebron still had that shaky jumper and poor defense.
and zero post game

[NBAplayoffs2001]

Interesting article about MJ vs Kobe at 22

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/wiley/010524.html

[ball4life27]

Hakeem is more skilled than Shaq but shaq is a better player, so lebron is better than kobe, dont care about skills

[To4]

Tracy McGrady.. Smooth as ***..

[RoundMoundOfReb]

I usually side with Bron in these discussions, but 2001 Kobe was better than 2007 Bron. Offensively they had fairly similar outputs, but Kobe was already a very good defender by then. Bron didn't focus on improving his defense to elite level until 2009.

Honestly 2001 Kobe was so so so good. Dude dominated the WC playoffs and arguably was more impactful than ****ing peak Shaq until the finals. It wasn't his peak as a player, but as far as performances go... it's arguably as good as we've seen from him.

Skillwise edge goes to Kobe, though that Kobe was just unreal athletically. I wish we could see him again. :bowdown:

This. 2001 is one of the best Kobe versions where as 2007 LeBron is a bottom 3 LeBron. It's close overall but i'd give Kobe a slight edge.

Interestingly enough though advanced stats say otherwise. LeBron's rapm for '07 was +7.4 and Kobe was just +4.0 in '01.

[iamgine]

Kobe = More skilled.

Lebron = Better player.

[sekachu]

Both of them had great playoffs even though Lebron lost in the finals leading a team as the 1st option even if it was a very weak eastern conference to the finals is always impressive at 22.

Kobe exploded in the WCF shooting 51% and averaging around 31/7/6 but didn't have a great finals.

So ignoring the NBA finals for both players, which showed more skill?

Not trying to create a flame thread on either player, I think this is a very interesting comparison.



We all know lebron will never be as skill as kobe so why bother at 22?

[Marlo_Stanfield]

LEBron>McGrady>Chuckbricks Cryant:applause:

[ball4life27]

2/5 > 2/7

[NBAplayoffs2001]

LEBron>McGrady>Chuckbricks Cryant:applause:

I knew an illiterate idiot like you wouldn't read the directions saying I am not trying to make this a flame thread just a pleasant debate.