I think kobe is above shaq all time

[The_Pharcyde]

granted shaq was better and more dominate on those laker teams they shared
the 3 finals mvp's back that up

but i have 3 things to say on kobes behalf
1. kobe is 6 years younger than shaq.. basically the difference between kyrie and lebron.. how can anyone expect this to be kyries team when they have the best player in the league in his athletic prime(same as shaq).. i guess my point for this is that people look at kobe on those teams and act as if he was in his prime, he was still young up and comer status while shaq was in his prime, shaq is the 100 million dollar man at this point.. kobe is sniffing his way there, put shaq on the 2006-09 lakers and whose team is it

2. shaq couldnt hit free throws... therefore you could not use him in late game situations because the defense would send a 50% shooter to the line rather than let him do anything.. thus making kobe the go to player for playmaking when you need a late bucket... tim grover always harps on guys you cant use when the game is late and tight

3. when these players werent together kobe won 2 more titles and gained two final mvps(taking away the fact he couldnt be the "guy") while shaq got another ring but played 2nd fiddle in the finals... also dont forget that shaq had those magic years before the lakers he also didnt win the title

both guys have 1 regular season mvp.. which is a farce and kobe has 1 more ring

ill say this, shaq had the higher peak... kobe had the better career

mj is better than both...
lbj is knocking on the door

[RightToCensor]

How long did it take you to type all that?

Because nobody thinks Shaq is above Kobe all-time.

[The_Pharcyde]

How long did it take you to type all that?

Because nobody thinks Shaq is above Kobe all-time.

i think there are plenty that have shaq above kobe.. its a legitimate question

i had shaq above him up until recently where i have seen kobes longevity transpire

[JT123]

How long did it take you to type all that?

Because nobody thinks Shaq is above Kobe all-time.
http://www.midwestsportsfans.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/mj-laughing.gif

[kwajo]

How long did it take you to type all that?

Because nobody thinks Shaq is above Kobe all-time.
Ummm, tons of people do, in fact I'd wager a majority of the populous.

[SpecialQue]

He's clearly higher on the all time list. Not even debatable.

[RightToCensor]

Let me rephrase that, no sane person thinks Shaq is above Kobe.

People who do so are message board agenda seekers.

[Levity]

Ummm, tons of people do, in fact I'd wager a majority of the populous.

doesnt sound like a safe bet to make.

[Doranku]

Ummm, tons of people do, in fact I'd wager a majority of the populous.
Yeah I doubt it. Most casual fans will pick Kobe.

[FKAri]

Let me rephrase that, no sane person thinks Shaq is above Kobe.

People who do so are message board agenda seekers.

imo Shaq was a better basketball player than Kobe. I can see arguments for the contrary as well. But there is no way Kobe is inargubly above Shaq.

[JT123]

OP may have a point when it comes to Kobe having better longevity, but that's pretty much where it ends. Kobe officially became the Lakers best player in 2002-2003, and remained their best player through the 12-13 season. In that 10 year span as the man he only managed to lead the Lakers to 2 rings, despite having a Championship caliber supporting cast for 7 of those 10 seasons. Also lost in the Finals twice as the favorite. :confusedshrug:
Kobe had a great career as a sidekick, but as the man he was massively underwhelming.

[The_Pharcyde]

the argument for shaq is that throughout his career at no point was kobe as good as shaq was in his prime

[RightToCensor]

I hope to god this doesn't become another multipage thread where stans are defending their favorite player with biased statements.

Kobe is better than Shaq, no debate.
Shaq had the more dominant peak.
Kobe has the longevity, consistency, and achievements over Shaq.

/thread

[bond10]

granted shaq was better and more dominate on those laker teams they shared
the 3 finals mvp's back that up

but i have 3 things to say on kobes behalf
1. kobe is 6 years younger than shaq.. basically the difference between kyrie and lebron.. how can anyone expect this to be kyries team when they have the best player in the league in his athletic prime(same as shaq).. i guess my point for this is that people look at kobe on those teams and act as if he was in his prime, he was still young up and comer status while shaq was in his prime, shaq is the 100 million dollar man at this point.. kobe is sniffing his way there, put shaq on the 2006-09 lakers and whose team is it

2. shaq couldnt hit free throws... therefore you could not use him in late game situations because the defense would send a 50% shooter to the line rather than let him do anything.. thus making kobe the go to player for playmaking when you need a late bucket... tim grover always harps on guys you cant use when the game is late and tight

3. when these players werent together kobe won 2 more titles and gained two final mvps(taking away the fact he couldnt be the "guy") while shaq got another ring but played 2nd fiddle in the finals... also dont forget that shaq had those magic years before the lakers he also didnt win the title

both guys have 1 regular season mvp.. which is a farce and kobe has 1 more ring

ill say this, shaq had the higher peak... kobe had the better career

mj is better than both...
lbj is knocking on the door


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DggAXSv53Qc

[Dr Seuss]

OP may have a point when it comes to Kobe having better longevity, but that's pretty much where it ends. Kobe officially became the Lakers best player in 2002-2003, and remained their best player through the 12-13 season. In that 10 year span as the man he only managed to lead the Lakers to 2 rings, despite having a Championship caliber supporting cast for 7 of those 10 seasons. Also lost in the Finals twice as the favorite. :confusedshrug:
Kobe had a great career as a sidekick, but as the man he was massively underwhelming.

the lakers werent favorites over the historically great Celtics super team. and shaq was part of the team that lost to the pistons, as well. youre beginning to sound like your avatar with all this nonsense youre spewing.

[JT123]

the lakers werent favorites over the historically great Celtics super team. and shaq was part of the team that lost to the pistons, as well. youre beginning to sound like your avatar with all this nonsense youre spewing.
You might wanna look at the Vegas odds again buddy. The Lakers were most definitely the favorites in 08, according to Vegas and the ESPN experts.
And while Shaq was still on the team in 04, Kobe had already taken over as the 1st option due to Shaq breaking down. Kobe almost single handedly lost the Lakers that Finals series against Detroit, don't try to put that on Shaq. :no:

[Rocketswin2013]

Shaq was better. So much better and consistent in the postseason. Peaked higher. Longevity is closer than people think overall. Though, I'm not high at all on Shaq's defense. I actually think Kobe at his best defensively('00) may have been better than several prime Shaq('94-'04) defensive years.

[The_Pharcyde]

You might wanna look at the Vegas odds again buddy. The Lakers were most definitely the favorites in 08, according to Vegas and the ESPN experts.
And while Shaq was still on the team in 04, Kobe had already taken over as the 1st option due to Shaq breaking down. Kobe almost single handedly lost the Lakers that Finals series against Detroit, don't try to put that on Shaq. :no:

so when the lakers win its all shaq
and when they lost it was all kobe "dont put that on shaq"


hmm okay...
i see a trend

[Dr Seuss]

You might wanna look at the Vegas odds again buddy. The Lakers were most definitely the favorites in 08, according to Vegas and the ESPN experts.
And while Shaq was still on the team in 04, Kobe had already taken over as the 1st option due to Shaq breaking down. He almost single handedly lost the Lakers that Finals series against Detroit, don't try to put that on Shaq. :no:

so the lakers squad, where bynum went down mid season, so they traded for pau who played 3 months with the team (still learning the triangle) before the playoffs were favorites to win the whole thing, after being outed in the first round the year before? Kobe must be the GOAT then.

[SHAQisGOAT]

Don't even think it can be ARGUED...

[The_Pharcyde]

Don't even think it can be ARGUED...

why, i mean i can probably guess your stance... but why

[IncarceratedBob]

kobe is more talented, more skilled, a better overall player

shaq was more physically gifted, and at the end of the day that trumps all, just look at lebron

[JT123]

so when the lakers win its all shaq
and when they lost it was all kobe "dont put that on shaq"


hmm okay...
i see a trend
Not at all. Kobe gets all the credit for the 09 chip, and half the credit for 2010. I would give him more credit for 2010, but since he got carried in game 7 he gets a little less.
The best player always gets the most credit for winning and most blame for losing. Why would we change the rules for Kobe? :confusedshrug:

[mehyaM24]

shaq had the better prime and peak, so why would anyone rate kobe over him because of his longevity? is reggie miller better than hakeem because of his longevity? dumb.

shaq is the greatest peak player ever, hence the MDE acronym. he's the reason why most posters picked the 2001 lakers over the 1991 bulls in the 'Champions 10 years later' thread i made. too big. too skilled. too strong. too dominant - the superman of basketball (lebron is that today).

[IllegalD]

You might wanna look at the Vegas odds again buddy. The Lakers were most definitely the favorites in 08, according to Vegas and the ESPN experts.
And while Shaq was still on the team in 04, Kobe had already taken over as the 1st option due to Shaq breaking down. Kobe almost single handedly lost the Lakers that Finals series against Detroit, don't try to put that on Shaq. :no:


https://espnfivethirtyeight.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/paine-datalab-lebron-cast-2.png?w=610&h=2028

The 35th ranked best supporting cast in NBA finals history was heavy favorites against the 4th ranked best supporting cast in NBA finals history? :confusedshrug:

[The_Pharcyde]

shaq had the better prime and peak, so why would anyone rate kobe over him because of his longevity? is reggie miller better than hakeem because of his longevity? dumb.

shaq is the greatest peak player ever, hence the MDE acronym. he's the reason why most posters picked the 2001 lakers over the 1991 bulls in the 'Champions 10 years later' thread i made. too big. too skilled. too strong. too dominant - the superman of basketball (lebron is that today).


two different caliber of player... not even close to kobe vs shaq
hakeem was an nba mvp and 2x title/finals mvp winner
reggie went to the finals once and never sniffed an mvp


kobe and shaq both have 1 mvp and 5 titles to 4 respectively

and also if longevity does not mean anything then tim duncan is gonna get knocked down a couple slots

[JT123]

so the lakers squad, where bynum went down mid season, so they traded for pau who played 3 months with the team (still learning the triangle) before the playoffs were favorites to win the whole thing, after being outed in the first round the year before? Kobe must be the GOAT then.
You can try and diminish Kobe's supporting cast all you like, but he still had two of the most skilled big men in the league in Pau and Odom. Not to mention the greatest coach of all time going against the unproven Doc Rivers. If Kobe is a top 10 player (in his prime) that should have been more than enough to beat a couple of aging stars.
And don't try to hype up the Celtics as some super team. A 37 win Hawks team gave them more of a challenge than Kobe could. :oldlol:

[imdaman99]

Shaq was the most wasted talent. He had the abilities to be the greatest ever but came up short because he didn't have the work ethic that Kobe did. Was Shaq still great? No doubt, but he was also a big baby that gave up on his commitments everywhere because of petty jealousy issues he had within himself.

Shaq left the Magic because he was jealous of Penny, Penny was more marketable. Shaq left the Lakers because he was jealous of Kobe, another player more marketable and popular to the youth. So on and so on, left the Heat on bad terms as well. I don't remember how he left the Cavs or Celtics but I assume he was ok with Lebron because Lebron was alright being a beta.

My point is, Shaq should have been the best ever but he is barely top 10. Kobe was significantly less talented, but he is higher up.

[mehyaM24]

two different caliber of player... not even close to kobe vs shaq
hakeem was an nba mvp and 2x title/finals mvp winner
reggie went to the finals once and never sniffed an mvp

kobe was never on shaq's tier, similarly to reggie and hakeem. shaq has the greatest peak and one of the greatest primes ever.
kobe doesn't sniff the top 10 in that regard.



kobe and shaq both have 1 mvp and 5 titles to 4 respectively

kobe played sidekick to shaq during both their respective primes. that should tell you all you need to know.

[G0ATbe]

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/53/53b0451f49406952107875ea6ac6ceeba16f21dff63312004c 9820d0112f8821.jpg

[imnew09]

The water is wet. Lebeta is 2/6

[Sakkreth]

Kobe has 0 case over Shaq. Kobe was Shaq's sidekick for many years.

[JT123]

The water is wet. Lebeta is 2/6
:lol rent free

[KirbyPls]

The water is wet. Lebeta is 2/6

meltdown.

[livinglegend]

granted shaq was better and more dominate on those laker teams they shared
the 3 finals mvp's back that up

but i have 3 things to say on kobes behalf
1. kobe is 6 years younger than shaq.. basically the difference between kyrie and lebron.. how can anyone expect this to be kyries team when they have the best player in the league in his athletic prime(same as shaq).. i guess my point for this is that people look at kobe on those teams and act as if he was in his prime, he was still young up and comer status while shaq was in his prime, shaq is the 100 million dollar man at this point.. kobe is sniffing his way there, put shaq on the 2006-09 lakers and whose team is it


You admitted yourself that Shaq had a better peak.
So, by your logic, it would still be shaq's team from 06-09.
I don't see what's your argument.


2. shaq couldnt hit free throws... therefore you could not use him in late game situations because the defense would send a 50% shooter to the line rather than let him do anything.. thus making kobe the go to player for playmaking when you need a late bucket... tim grover always harps on guys you cant use when the game is late and tight

Shaq was still the main man in the 4th quarter.


3. when these players werent together kobe won 2 more titles and gained two final mvps(taking away the fact he couldnt be the "guy") while shaq got another ring but played 2nd fiddle in the finals... also dont forget that shaq had those magic years before the lakers he also didnt win the title

both guys have 1 regular season mvp.. which is a farce and kobe has 1 more ring

ill say this, shaq had the higher peak... kobe had the better career


I don't see what's the argument again.
You admitted yourself that Shaq played his prime with Kobe, while Kobe had the opportunity to play his prime with other stacked teams.
It's logical that a prime Kobe would do better without Shaq than an old shaq would do without kobe.
And for accomplishments, Shaq has 3 FMVPs and Kobe has 2 ( one he didn't deserve)

[triangleoffense]

say what u will OP makes some good points and is at least thought out. Rep'd

[TheMarkMadsen]

Kobe has 0 case over Shaq. Kobe was Shaq's sidekick for many years.

how many "sidekicks" led their team in FGA and 4th quarter scoring while averaging 28/6/6 for b2b championships

[outbreak]

how many "sidekicks" led their team in FGA and 4th quarter scoring while averaging 28/6/6 for b2b championships
How many sidekicks have the most dominant big man of their era drawing the defence in to double/triple him creating open shots for him?

[Dr Seuss]

How many sidekicks have the most dominant big man of their era drawing the defence in to double/triple him creating open shots for him?

great point, except for the fact that teams were never playing off kobe. and he still saw his fair share of doubles, as did shaq, who also saw triples in some instances.

and if were gonna dive even deeper into this, chauncey even admitted that the 04 pistons deliberately played single coverage on shaq, which is all honesty, worked beautifully for them

[aj1987]

Don't even think it can be ARGUED...
:wtf:

Seriously? I have Shaq in my top 5. Kobe's at ~7-8.

[TheMarkMadsen]

How many sidekicks have the most dominant big man of their era drawing the defence in to double/triple him creating open shots for him?

most played out excuse ever

Kobe put up better numbers in the playoffs without Shaq while winning b2b titles... He didn't need Shaq to put up those numbers.. those are the result of Kobe being as great as he is..

if you want to claim that Kobe never saw double teams during the 3peat then please take your shit elsewhere

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teIq5v0tTnY


2000 playoffs, down a bucket.. how come Kobe gets doubled as soon as he begins to drive.. why aren't the defenders triple teaming Shaq.. surely Kobe was wide open :rolleyes: :confusedshrug:

or what about this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLOMEmRQ40U

watch as how the entire team collapses on the 20 year old as Shaq's man leaves him to go help on Kobe..

these are two crucial/clutch moments in the playoffs and yet Kobe was the one getting doubled.. you excuses for brushing aside Kobe's accomplishments during this time are hilarious

and this was during the 2000 playoffs, before Kobe was even known to be as deadly as he was the next two years..

[aj1987]

I like how this excuse is used for why Kobe could put up such monster numbers....

But the exact opposite is used as to why Wade's and Bosh's number plummeted so hard "bu bu they're not the first option so their numbers will drop next to LeBron!"
You do realize that outbreak hates LeBron, right?

Rent = Free

[aj1987]

The rent is free for me in your head apparently, you following me around quoting posts I'm about to delete because I just don't care enough about the topic to leave them up.
I subscribe to every thread I post in. Since I posted in this thread literally 20 minutes ago, it's bound to show up in my User CP.

[Droid101]

I subscribe to every thread I post in. Since I posted in this thread literally 20 minutes ago, it's bound to show up in my User CP.
I knew you would do it again! :lol

:cheers:

[aj1987]

I knew you would do it again! :lol

:cheers:
:roll: :roll:

:cheers:

[Yoda]

i think there are plenty that have shaq above kobe.. its a legitimate question

i had shaq above him up until recently where i have seen kobes longevity transpire

http://i1.kwejk.pl/k/obrazki/f86656da01b649a4c50d1552b01bb113.jpg

[SouBeachTalents]

Lol at idiots saying it's not close or even debatable for either player. Regardless of which one you have ranked higher, they're basically in the same tier on the all time list

[rmt]

How long did it take you to type all that?

Because nobody thinks Shaq is above Kobe all-time.

You may speak for yourself, but not for me. I think Shaq is above Kobe all-time.

[Smoke117]

http://www.totalprosports.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/shaq-laughing-press-conference-shaq-gifs.gif

[Nash]

outside of this forum people usually have Shaq above Kobe.

At realgm's player comparison Shaq got 75% of the votes.

Shaq is usually in the top 7 all time and Kobe is usually around 10 in most all time lists. Its only on this forum Kobe all of a sudden wins and as some guy said on this thread, 'its not even close, kobe wins'.

[TheBigVeto]

Wrong

Shaq is overrated but much better than Kobe all time. It's not even close. The difference is like between Michael Jordan and Jeremy Lin.

[monkeypox]

Shaq never proved he could lead a team to a title without Kobe. Kobe proved he could lead a team to a title without Shaq twice.

[Bankaii]

Shaq never proved he could lead a team to a title without Kobe. Kobe proved he could lead a team to a title without Shaq twice.
This is such a stupid argument. Shaq spent the majority of his prime with the Lakers. He was too young in Orlando and too old with Miami.
Kobe started his peak a year after Shaq left and had time to win alone.
Besides, in 2000 Shaq basically won with a bunch of role players, including Kobe.

[PickernRoller]

That's not uncontroversial. Kobe is above Shaq in Top 10 all-time.

[nzahir]

Shaq never proved he could lead a team to a title without Kobe. Kobe proved he could lead a team to a title without Shaq twice.
A young shaq took orlando to the finals in his 3rd year and beat Mj. If shaq stayed longer and penny stayed healthy I think they would win multiple rings as well.
3 final mvps>2 final mvps
1 mvp=1 mvp
Kobe has 1 more ring, in total accomplishments in finals, fmvps, and mvps they are equal but I value fmvps more than just rings.
I got both top 10, I just got shaq higher, his prime is arguably the greatest prime(mj, shaq, lebron, bird, kareem top 5 primes imo)

[TheMarkMadsen]

This is such a stupid argument. Shaq spent the majority of his prime with the Lakers. He was too young in Orlando and too old with Miami.
Kobe started his peak a year after Shaq left and had time to win alone.
Besides, in 2000 Shaq basically won with a bunch of role players, including Kobe.

is that why in game 7 of the WCF Kobe had more points, rebound, assist, steals and blocks than Shaq did..

[The_Pharcyde]

say what u will OP makes some good points and is at least thought out. Rep'd

salute

[Bankaii]

is that why in game 7 of the WCF Kobe had more points, rebound, assist, steals and blocks than Shaq did..
My bad forgot to put 2000 Finals*.
That is where championships are won, correct?
Also where Kobe absolutely crapped the bed.

[The_Pharcyde]

This is such a stupid argument. Shaq spent the majority of his prime with the Lakers. He was too young in Orlando and too old with Miami.
Kobe started his peak a year after Shaq left and had time to win alone.
Besides, in 2000 Shaq basically won with a bunch of role players, including Kobe.

wait up, shaq was too young in orlando at 24 years old... but kobe at 22 is supposed to be the man over 28 year old shaq?

[Droid101]

My bad forgot to put 2000 Finals*.
That is where championships are won, correct?
Also where Kobe absolutely crapped the bed.
I recall he saved the Lakers in one game, and was intentionally injured in another one.

"Crapped the bed."

[TheMarkMadsen]

My bad forgot to put 2000 Finals*.
That is where championships are won, correct?
Also where Kobe absolutely crapped the bed.

are you just magically transported to the finals or do you have to play games before that to determine if you make the finals :confusedshrug: :confusedshrug:


Kobe hit two free throws and a jump shot to put the Lakers up 4 in the closing minutes of game 7 of the WCF, and then the assist the Shaq.. Kobe won them that game..

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CHrGIOXUYAEfjlX.jpg

Lakers don't make the finals without a teenager stepping up and having a better game than the "MDE" is his absolute prime.. give credit where credit is due..

Kobe had some many clutch moments/ game winners during that run, including game 4 of the finals where he absolutly took over after Shaq fouled out..

Kobe ended up having a better career than Shaq anyways, and that's what this thread is about.. he proved he didn't need Shaq to win titles, made 3 straight finals without him, won an mvp, won 2 FMVP, continued being first team all nba without him.. which was more than Shaq ever did without Kobe..

[TheMarkMadsen]

I recall he saved the Lakers in one game, and was intentionally injured in another one.

"Crapped the bed."

you would be correct sir

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7Lp5aQq4zI

[mehyaM24]

Lol at idiots saying it's not close or even debatable for either player. Regardless of which one you have ranked higher, they're basically in the same tier on the all time list

shaq being the better peak and prime player isn't debatable. shaq's prime is goat tier, kobe's prime, while really good, is not that.

simply adding longevity is similar to morons boosting tim duncan's legacy, thinking he's better than/on the same tier with kareem, magic or russell.

[tpols]

shaq being the better peak and prime player isn't debatable. shaq's prime is goat tier, kobe's prime, while really good, is not that.

simply adding longevity is similar to morons boosting tim duncan's legacy, thinking he's better than/on the same tier with kareem, magic or russell.

Shaq has a better peak/prime than everyone except Jordan wilt and kareem individual wise.. yet he's never been considered top 3 anywhere I've seen.. not on this forum. Leadership and chemistry matter when it comes to winning.. and he's on the bottom of the top 10 list in that regard.. which is why his winning is lower than most of the others relative to help.

[mehyaM24]

Shaq has a better peak/prime than everyone except Jordan wilt and kareem individual wise.. yet he's never been considered top 3 anywhere I've seen.. not on this forum.

that's because most basketball fans are casuals. see the op.

[tpols]

that's because most basketball fans are casuals. see the op.

Nothing to do with casuals.. I've literally never seen Shaq ranked top 3.. like where his peaks at. Never.. most knowledgeable posters included, hell I'd dare you to even show me a few posts from reputable posters showing as much

[Akrazotile]

Nothing to do with casuals.. I've literally never seen Shaq ranked top 3.. like where his peaks at. Never.. most knowledgeable posters included, hell I'd dare you to even show me a few posts from reputable posters showing as much


These same "reputable people" will rank Wilt and Russell despite having never seen them play.

Rankings are silly. Nobody saw the early players play. And a lot of players are simply EQUAL to each as far as any human can actually tell, yet everyone feels the need to have an order where one comes after another.

Rankings dont mean crap. What can you ARTICULATE about a specific comparison?

If you can draft either one of these guys WITHOUT knowing what the team around them will look like (and lets assume all stans were givin an objectivity drug) 10 out of 10 people are taking Shaq. Thats all you need to know to understand why he ranks abead of Kobe. Basketball is about impact. Fisher has 5 rings. Horry has 7. Counting that shit in a team game is for clowns.

You would draft Shaq over Kobe, period. Even if you want to lie to stick to a point, we all know you would.

Shaq > Kobe.

[tpols]

Professional GM's drafted sam bowie before jordan... doesn't mean a damn thing. Shaq may have been way more "talented" than say Tim Duncan yet who had the better career due to superior intangibles?

[Akrazotile]

Professional GM's drafted sam bowie before jordan... doesn't mean a damn thing. Shaq may have been way more "talented" than say Tim Duncan yet who had the better career due to superior intangibles?

Yeah, that was before either of them played an NBA game and they were projecting their careers, AND fitting them onto a specific team. But I'm talking about now, in hindsight.

I'm saying if you had a franchise today and your primary goal was to win, and you had no clue what other players you were going to be able to add but you had to start by drafting either Shaq or Kobe - based on having now seen them play in the NBA - you are taking Shaq. Every single non-bias person is.


Do you disagree?

[tpols]

Yeah, that was before either of them played an NBA game and they were projecting their careers, AND fitting them onto a specific team. But I'm talking about now, in hindsight.

I'm saying if you had a franchise today and your primary goal was to win, and you had no clue what other players you were going to be able to add but you had to start by drafting either Shaq or Kobe - based on having now seen them play in the NBA - you are taking Shaq. Every single non-bias person is.


Do you disagree?

If you drafted shaq.. you'd have 0 rings. You'd be the Orlando magic.


If you drafted kobe you'd have 2 rings (had to minus the first 3peat :rolleyes: )


What's better ese.. dos o cero ? :confusedshrug:

[Akrazotile]

If you drafted shaq.. you'd have 0 rings. You'd be the Orlando magic.


If you drafted kobe you'd have 2 rings (had to minus the first 3peat :rolleyes: )


What's better ese.. dos o cero ? :confusedshrug:


Man.

:facepalm

[rmt]

Professional GM's drafted sam bowie before jordan... doesn't mean a damn thing. Shaq may have been way more "talented" than say Tim Duncan yet who had the better career due to superior intangibles?

Knowing how their careers have played out, would you draft Kobe over Shaq?

Sorry, saw your answer above.

Then you would lose more. There's not one thing that Kobe has on Shaq when it comes to winning - not impact, not dominance, not ease of building around, nothing.

Maybe if the object is to sell more jerseys or put more fans in the arena or get a bigger TV deal but WINNING - Shaq over Kobe every day and twice on Sunday.

[rmt]

Man.

:facepalm

Kobe stans are not realistic.

[SouBeachTalents]

Knowing how their careers have played out, would you draft Kobe over Shaq?

Sorry, saw your answer above.

Then you would lose more. There's not one thing that Kobe has on Shaq when it comes to winning - not impact, not dominance, not ease of building around, nothing.

Maybe if the object is to sell more jerseys or put more fans in the arena or get a bigger TV deal but WINNING - Shaq over Kobe every day and twice on Sunday.

Even that is arguable, Shaq was a mega star, if he played in the social media era imo he'd be a global icon like LeBron & Kobe currently are

[rmt]

Even that is arguable, Shaq was a mega star, if he played in the social media era imo he'd be a global icon like LeBron & Kobe currently are

True and WINNING brings in the fans regardless.

[tpols]

Knowing how their careers have played out, would you draft Kobe over Shaq?

Sorry, saw your answer above.

Then you would lose more. There's not one thing that Kobe has on Shaq when it comes to winning - not impact, not dominance, not ease of building around, nothing.

Maybe if the object is to sell more jerseys or put more fans in the arena or get a bigger TV deal but WINNING - Shaq over Kobe every day and twice on Sunday.

What do you mean knowing how their careers played out ?

We saw shaqs career play out.. he was a very dominant individual player with severe team basketball flaws.. namely closing games and building long term chemistry.. he sucked at.

Kobe won multiple rings with a borderline HOF front court teammate.. shaq required first ballot guards to win less.

[RightToCensor]

Drafting?! :oldlol:
That's the argument for Shaq?!!? :oldlol:
Patrick Ewing would get drafted over Bill Russell 10/10

[Bankaii]

you would be correct sir

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7Lp5aQq4zI
Except the series isn't won in one game. Defoe the overall ENTIRE series Kobe averaged 16 points on 37% shooting. Shaquille averaged more rebounds than Kobe did points. Think about that. Kobe shat the bed in the 2000 Finals and was a role player, get over it.

And no, Kobe didn't have a better career than Shaq. They are on the same tier no doubt, but Shaq has a better career than Kobe.

[Round Mound]

Shaq was the best player in the league for many years. Kobe was never the best.

[rmt]

What do you mean knowing how their careers played out ?

We saw shaqs career play out.. he was a very dominant individual player with severe team basketball flaws.. namely closing games and building long term chemistry.. he sucked at.

Kobe won multiple rings with a borderline HOF front court teammate.. shaq required first ballot guards to win less.

Do you think Kobe's gonna make the playoffs ever again (on the Lakers)? I guess he could continue to play until he breaks KAJ's scoring record, but he won't be winning titles unless he ring chases on a contender. So I'd say his career has pretty much played out.

Why is closing out games that important? Aren't the 24 points Shaq averaged worth the same whether they came at the beginning, middle or end of the game?

I'd say that Shaq was better than Kobe at building long term chemistry. Kobe is the one who sucked at it - Shaq, Bynum, Dwight, and from the interview LMA too.

Unless you've forgotten - Kobe was not a first ballot guard in 2000 so Shaq did win without one. Gasol > 2000 Kobe.

[SouBeachTalents]

Shaq was the best player in the league for many years. Kobe was never the best.

Which years would you say?

[Bankaii]

I recall he saved the Lakers in one game, and was intentionally injured in another one.

"Crapped the bed."
4th highest MPG of anyone, 4th most FGA of anyone, and 3 highest usage rate of anyone else in the series. If he was healthy enough to play elite defense and chuck up bricks while everyone focused on Shaq, he was healthy enough to play decent.

[tpols]

Do you think Kobe's gonna make the playoffs ever again (on the Lakers)? I guess he could continue to play until he breaks KAJ's scoring record, but he won't be winning titles unless he ring chases on a contender. So I'd say his career has pretty much played out.

Why is closing out games that important? Aren't the 24 points Shaq averaged worth the same whether they came at the beginning, middle or end of the game?

I'd say that Shaq was better than Kobe at building long term chemistry. Kobe is the one who sucked at it - Shaq, Bynum, Dwight, and from the interview LMA too.

Point distribution skewing towards the end given equal volume is obviously more valuable.. especially given the fact that one player was a liability at the line.


Lol at bynum.. and including shaq in a comparison.. with shaq. Dwight is laughable too.. how about shaq burning bridges with not only kobe, but wade, phoenix and then every team he shamelessly hopped to in search for more rings.. while kobe at least stayed put, and didn't sell his soul for more attention

[Round Mound]

Which years would you say?

1999-00 to 02-03 Shaq Was Easily The Best Player in The World As Far As Dominance and Efficiency Its Not Even Close. While For Kobe He Was Usually Below Garnett Until The Late 00s and Pretty Much Always Below Duncan, Lebron and Sometimes Under Dirk. Those Players Where More Dominant and Efficient Than Kobe Was. And I Say This While Also Saying Kobe Was The Most Skilled Player in The League In 00s. He Just Wasnt as Dominant As Those Other Players.

[rmt]

tpols,

added this to my post:

Unless you've forgotten - Kobe was not a first ballot guard in 2000 so Shaq did win without one. Gasol > 2000 Kobe.

[tpols]

tpols,

added this to my post:

Unless you've forgotten - Kobe was not a first ballot guard in 2000 so Shaq did win without one. Gasol > 2000 Kobe.

saw that.. "multiple rings without a first ballot"

[I<3NBA]

if Shaq didn't give Kobe those 3 rings, does Kobe go above Shaq all time?

[K Xerxes]

Shaq's longevity might be the single most underrated thing in this forum. Do people even bother to think for themselves or just accept the herd opinion?

From the moment he came into the league, Shaq averaged 20-10 thirteen consecutive seasons. That's more than anyone else, ever. Not even Kareem, Wilt or Hakeem had more than 13 seasons total, let alone consecutively.

People act like Shaq was only dominant from 00-02, but he was dominant from 93-05, arguably until 06. Thirteen very elite seasons. Kobe was elite from 00-13, an incredible one season more, and even then was he better in 00 than Shaq was in any of those thirteen seasons? Dude hasn't done jack shit for 2 years either. Let's not act like there is some seismic difference in their longevity, and certainly not one that should overlook their pretty clear difference in peak levels.

Personally, I don't think it's much of a debate. I got Shaq a tier higher because he was simply a better player for their careers, but I can understand if some people think it's a debate, or even rank Kobe higher. Different criteria, to each their own. But it's not something to be dismissed at all.

Also, Kobe shouldn't get brownie points for his work ethic and maximising his potential. Just like I won't give brownie points to AI, Isiah or Chris Paul for being great players despite being midgets. We're looking at who is the better basketball player overall, and even if Shaq was 'lazy' (disagree), his behemoth build should only be looked on favorably.

[Bandito]

You can try and diminish Kobe's supporting cast all you like, but he still had two of the most skilled big men in the league in Pau and Odom. Not to mention the greatest coach of all time going against the unproven Doc Rivers. If Kobe is a top 10 player (in his prime) that should have been more than enough to beat a couple of aging stars.
And don't try to hype up the Celtics as some super team. A 37 win Hawks team gave them more of a challenge than Kobe could. :oldlol:
:lol

Not only was he a bench player he was inconsistent throughout hes career. Welcome back we missed the retarded Lebron family...not.

[Orlando Magic]

I think that OP is a dumbass.

It can be argued that rookie Shaq better than Kobe ever was. Rookie Shaq was worth 20 wins.

Shaq from 92 to 05 is a far better 13 year stretch than Kobe ever had so this myth about Kobe having a more successful/lengthy career is just nonsense that people perceive as truth because Kobe came into the league 4 years later and as a younger player.

[superteamtheory]

My bad forgot to put 2000 Finals*.
That is where championships are won, correct?

Shaq (paraphrased) after they beat Blazers: "We've won the 2000 championship. That was the team we had to get past." ... I can't link you to quote, sorry, but if you watch the broadcasts of the Finals, the commentators mention Shaq being Shaq saying stuff like this... Thing is, he's right. His Lakers were notorious to that point for choking in 2nd or 3rd round, looked like it might happen again vs. deep Blazers who took them to 7 games, then the comeback and oop happened and the rest is history.. Pacers climbed up a weaker East, were outmuscled from the getgo vs. L.A., would have lost in 5 if not for the wacky 2-3-2 format..



Also where Kobe absolutely crapped the bed.

...because of wacky 2-3-2 format, the Pacers had an opportunity to win 3 straight when Shaq was temporarily unavailable for Lakers (after questionable soft call for 6th foul), which means there ends up being a game 7 in L.A., which means it becomes (unlikely but) possible for Pacers to pull off the upset. ... instead, this happened:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzmRk15I7g4

( ^ lol at them having to advertise NBA.com on scorestble ticker ... people only just starting to have internet access ... )

Doug Collins in broadcast: "This is Chicago's oldplay for Michael Jordan"... the eye test confirms, as well, youngJordan-like ability for youngKobe... now, how the rest of Kobe's career went from 02 and onward, yeah there are some things to question... but it's unproductive to diss anything from and including 1997-2001..

[superteamtheory]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzmRk15I7g4

oh and i forgot to mention, that's coming off a sprained ankle...

[West-Side]

I love how people act like 2000 Kobe was some role player.
Go re-watch the Portland series or the Phoenix series; or parts of the NBA finals when Kobe carried the team on his back in over-time.

Lets not forget, Kobe got injured by Jalen Rose in game 2.
He played hurt for the remainder of that series.

In 2000 playoffs:

27.80 PPG on 50% shooting Vs. Kings (LA won 3-2)
25 points, 11 rebounds, 7 assists, 4 blocks on 48% shooting in game 7 against Portland.
Hit 5 key buckets in game 4 against Indiana in OT when Shaq fouled out.

Without him, they don't win the championship that year.
Shaq was the man; the most dominant force in the league by a wide margin, but he needed Kobe that year to win the title. Of course, Kobe would have never won without Shaq that year; but calling him a role player that year is just laughable.

Role players don't produce 24/4/4 numbers and come up huge in big games and crucial moments in the playoffs. Kobe wasn't just a Ray Allen story of 2013; the man led the Lakers in 4th quarter scoring too.

[Bankaii]

oh and i forgot to mention, that's coming off a sprained ankle...
Meh, quotes from players mean nothing to me. Everyone pulls the team narrative, it's good PR and keeps chemistry.

And I'm not saying Kobe was ass the entire series. But 16 points on 37% shooting, that's role player numbers.
Shaq carried him in the 2000 Finals, because overall Kobe shat the bed, there's no refuting it.

[superteamtheory]

I love how people act like 2000 Kobe was some role player.
Go re-watch the Portland series or the Phoenix series; or parts of the NBA finals when Kobe carried the team on his back in over-time.

Lets not forget, Kobe got injured by Jalen Rose in game 2.
He played hurt for the remainder of that series.

In 2000 playoffs:

27.80 PPG on 50% shooting Vs. Kings (LA won 3-2)
25 points, 11 rebounds, 7 assists, 4 blocks on 48% shooting in game 7 against Portland.
Hit 5 key buckets in game 4 against Indiana in OT when Shaq fouled out.

Without him, they don't win the championship that year.
Shaq was the man; the most dominant force in the league by a wide margin, but he needed Kobe that year to win the title. Of course, Kobe would have never won without Shaq that year; but calling him a role player that year is just laughable.

Role players don't produce 24/4/4 numbers and come up huge in big games and crucial moments in the playoffs. Kobe wasn't just a Ray Allen story of 2013; the man led the Lakers in 4th quarter scoring too.

The reason there is so much confusion over this is people forget the Lakers basically had no bench 2000-2004.. (well, 2005-2007 too and their 2009-2011 benches weren't that good, 2012&2013 back to bad / isn't there really..)

the threepeat starting 5 (meaning: Fisher-Kobe-Fox-Horry-Shaq) was supergreat but then what? ready to retire Ron Harper? stillcandunkbutold Mitch Richmond? Deven George? et cetera..
it was sortofa "2 man team" heavily reliant on maximum Kobe-Shaq production and by 2003 vs. Spurs that lack of depth finally caught up to them (then got exposed one more time in 2004 Finals) .. if Lakers have a great bench, then yeah, Kobe's part on those teams is less impressive, but it wasn't like that, Shaqball may have been half the team but Kobeball was 33% ... 2% HorryorFisherbigshotball and 15% the actual role players..

[iamgine]

granted shaq was better and more dominate on those laker teams they shared
the 3 finals mvp's back that up

but i have 3 things to say on kobes behalf
1. kobe is 6 years younger than shaq.. basically the difference between kyrie and lebron.. how can anyone expect this to be kyries team when they have the best player in the league in his athletic prime(same as shaq).. i guess my point for this is that people look at kobe on those teams and act as if he was in his prime, he was still young up and comer status while shaq was in his prime, shaq is the 100 million dollar man at this point.. kobe is sniffing his way there, put shaq on the 2006-09 lakers and whose team is it

2. shaq couldnt hit free throws... therefore you could not use him in late game situations because the defense would send a 50% shooter to the line rather than let him do anything.. thus making kobe the go to player for playmaking when you need a late bucket... tim grover always harps on guys you cant use when the game is late and tight

3. when these players werent together kobe won 2 more titles and gained two final mvps(taking away the fact he couldnt be the "guy") while shaq got another ring but played 2nd fiddle in the finals... also dont forget that shaq had those magic years before the lakers he also didnt win the title

both guys have 1 regular season mvp.. which is a farce and kobe has 1 more ring

ill say this, shaq had the higher peak... kobe had the better career

mj is better than both...
lbj is knocking on the door
People do compare them both at their respective primes/peak and I'd say most would consider Shaq more dominant despite less rings.

[JT123]

I think that OP is a dumbass.

It can be argued that rookie Shaq better than Kobe ever was. Rookie Shaq was worth 20 wins.

Shaq from 92 to 05 is a far better 13 year stretch than Kobe ever had so this myth about Kobe having a more successful/lengthy career is just nonsense that people perceive as truth because Kobe came into the league 4 years later and as a younger player.
:applause: Excellent post. When you really think about it, Kobe's longevity is massively overrated. Guy was a role player his first 3 seasons, and he has been irrelevant the last 2 seasons.
I take what I said earlier, Kobe doesn't even have the longevity argument over Shaq.

[West-Side]

:applause: Excellent post. When you really think about it, Kobe's longevity is massively overrated. Guy was a role player his first 3 seasons, and he has been irrelevant the last 2 seasons.
I take what I said earlier, Kobe doesn't even have the longevity argument over Shaq.


From 1992 - 2005; Shaq played an average of 67 games a season (total of 941 games).

From 2000 - 2013; Kobe played an average of 74 games a season (total of 1039).

In those year they achieved the following accolades;

Shaq

4 championships
12 All-Stars
1 MVP
3 Finals MVP
7 x 1st Team All-NBA
8 x In Top 5 MVP voting

26.21 PPG, 11.66 RPG, 2.77 APG

Kobe

5 championships
14 All-Stars
1 MVP
2 Finals MVP
10 x 1st Team All-NBA
11 x In Top 5 MVP voting

27.67 PPG, 5.71 RPG, 5.21 APG

- Kobe played more games and more MPG
- Kobe made more All-Star selections
- Kobe made more 1st Team All-NBA
- Shaq won 1 more Finals MVP
- Kobe won 1 more championship
- Kobe finished in the top 5 MVP shares more times
- Kobe has beaten more 50+ win teams in the playoffs from 2008 to 2010 than Shaq has without Kobe on his team for his entire career (92-97 & 05 - end of his career). That's a total of 10+ playoff appearances against 3 playoff appearances.

But yeah we can say Shaq's longevity was "greater".