How do you go about ranking Kobe Bryant?

[ArbitraryWater]

Ive obviously ranked him before and have established opinions on him, but I still find it as hard as ranking Russell almost.

Purely statistically, Bryant is not among the top 20-25 payers of all time. His situations have been favorable.

He was the clear #2 guy on a 3-peat team, in a role many other players could theoretically fill. Nothing about his 2000 or 2002 rings is noteworthy. He played in a big market and was hyped as the next Jordan and this would lay the bueprint to his career and following and fortunate reputation.

For very few other players could you make a simple team switch and ask, how much differently would he be revered if he played there?

If Kobe was on a team unfit to win his whole career and he has 0 rings, how much does he really have to show back on?

Then hes on his own, does his thing, gets team to low playoff seeds, doesnt do anything spectaculary in the playoffs and loses as underdog, as he usually did, never breaking the barrier.

Then he does win 2 rings on "his own", but being honest he was not better than James or Wade both those years. He was the only top 5 payer in the league with an all star teammate, so the seas basically parted for him. Top 5 payer + a star teammate is a almost historical requirement for a title. He drops off very quick after those b2b titles.

Nowadays with the huge talent influx, there are 2-3 SGs producing and outproducing Bryant, that game wise show little to no deficit, but theyre not in the same situation, or market, and no one would dare of hyping them up top 10 a time.

The ony time Kobe truly looked GOAT/top 10 ish was 2002/2003. The 2001 playoffs. And the 2006-2008 span could be argued. 2 years of which were peak volume scoring with little defense in one of the most inflated seasons ever (2006). 2008 was very mature and he lived up to his end of the bargain.

Purely game wise, production, impact, taken as a single unit, it seems Kobe Bryant does not necessarily fit to be among maybe the top 20 greatest payers ever.

But of course that seems weird to say over a guy who led 2 teams to championships (though in the future this will be the norm since even in just 50 years, 25+ payers will have led tite teams).

There isnt even much Longevity to speak of. Longevity should refer not just to playing, but to playing at a serviceable level. When we enter ATG standards, Kobe has like 8 superstar seasons. Even in his usual prime window from 2000-2013, he had shoddy off years in there (2004, 2005) which are quite frankly beneath that of a top 25 all time caliber player.


A nice scorer, selfish chucker, poor shot selection/efficiency, always covered by top rebounding squads and proportionally great supporting casts (relative to league average), little to no playmaking besides entry passes, became a lazy defender very early on, and was not often a good locker room influence and constantly made it tough on teammates. I forgot who it was who said he was really lucky it was Gasol who they traded for, he was just about the only one who woud have taken a his shit.

But he did lead 2 tite teams, was a top 5 player for about 10 years, and just a scoring machine.

[elementally morale]

Age is a factor here. Someone being under 30 now is not likely to see Kobe for what he was. I saw a chunk of Kareem's career but I could not 'rank him' properly. He was before my time and when he retired I was like 14. I just don't have a strong opinion of him. People tend to select most of their 'best players' from a group of people who were in their primes at the time when the individual was a later teen to very young adult. I'd say your 'favorite players' are usually from a group that played their best ball when you were between 15-25. We see this elsewhere, too. Music, movies. etc. One cannot be historically objective.

That being said, I take no offense if someone doesn't include Kobe in their top 10 (or top 20 for that matter). He was more important to me than he can be to someone who is my kids' age. I think you will have little luck with your 'not top 20-25' talk here. Some trolls will come to agree but that's it. I'd put him higher but I'm old enough not to take offense if someone does not.

[RRR3]

Kobe did not have poor efficiency, at least do your research :lol

[warriorfan]

https://i.postimg.cc/JntBgtP1/IMG-2223.jpg

[ArbitraryWater]

Kobe did not have poor efficiency, at least do your research :lol


I didnt know I needed to add relative to... you know... his all time rank contemporaries, the thread topic.

[SouBeachTalents]

Talking strictly peak for peak, which I think makes for a more interesting discussion regarding Kobe than where he ranks all all-time, I still think he was one of the 20 best players to ever do it. And while I do agree that people severely downplay those b2b title teams due to their weak roster historically speaking, at the time that was the best or 2nd best supporting cast in the league, and frankly blew away what the other top 5 players at the time had to work with.

Having said that, you kind of overly dismiss him winning b2b titles a little too much imo. We've seen plenty of guys in his situation not even come close to reaching those heights with comparable teams, either due to underperformance or injury, KD & Kawhi come to mind in recent years.

Just to see where you gauge him, you get to choose one of these guys or Kobe for a playoff run, which of them are you taking over Kobe.

KD
Robinson
KG
Barkley
Dirk

[RRR3]

I didnt know I needed to add relative to... you know... his all time rank contemporaries, the thread topic.
It's bad compared to LeBron or MJ, sure, but that's now who he should be compared to. His efficiency relative to league average was comparable to Hakeem, Duncan, KG, Dwyane Wade, Isiah Thomas and others who are ranked quite highly.

[ArbitraryWater]

Talking strictly peak for peak, which I think makes for a more interesting discussion regarding Kobe than where he ranks all all-time, I still think he was one of the 20 best players to ever do it. And while I do agree that people severely downplay those b2b title teams due to their weak roster historically speaking, at the time that was the best or 2nd best supporting cast in the league, and frankly blew away what the other top 5 players at the time had to work with.

Having said that, you kind of overly dismiss him winning b2b titles a little too much imo. We've seen plenty of guys in his situation not even come close to reaching those heights with comparable teams, either due to underperformance or injury, KD & Kawhi come to mind in recent years.

Just to see where you gauge him, you get to choose one of these guys or Kobe for a playoff run, which of them are you taking over Kobe.

KD
Robinson
KG
Barkley
Dirk


Yeah and I probably wouldnt rank KD over Kobe.

Guys just never cut it.


Kawhi is another issue.

How much sympathy/forgive do we apply for injuries?

Cause him not winning chips was usually not his blame (except for 2020 where he disappeared also). Peak wise Id definitely consider Kawhi a more challenging competitor.


A singular playoff run?

I dont see much sense in ranking for a singular playoff run. Its one run. Especially when said player who may even get the top spot here, not ever reach said heights again.


I think Dirks had a far more calming, harmonuous impact on his teams than Kobe and his swash buckle, disruptive, my way or the highway style.


But Barkley more or less hits the nail on the head.

Can I genuinely say Kobes best year or 5 best years top Barkleys 5 best? Not at all.

Id take him over KG cause I think KG was never quite equipped to be a go-to scorer at a championship leading level.


Id need to do some studying on Robinson again. I know he also has that weird RS/Playoffs gap, so did he get so much worse his RS edge gets lost, was there more context/sympathy to his case?....

But generally I wouldnt rank Robinson over Kobe, probably.

[ArbitraryWater]

It's bad compared to LeBron or MJ, sure, but that's now who he should be compared to. His efficiency relative to league average was comparable to Hakeem, Duncan, KG, Dwyane Wade, Isiah Thomas and others who are ranked quite highly.

Kobe from 1999-2013 had an eFG% of 49%. Birds was 51.5%. Magic was at 53%eFG. Hakeem was 51.6% through 1997. Duncan was 51% through 2013. Wades was 51% through 2014.

What are you imaginining here?


Isiah Thomas? lmao

[StrongLurk]

If we treat all eras equal (i.e Russell/Wilt), then Kobe is in the top 7-10 all time for me. If we remove Russell/Wilt, then Kobe can be top 5-8.

I think the biggest deciding factor in Kobe's ranking is how you view his DEFENSE. If you think he is overrated defensively (I do), then he simply can't be a top five player of all time. BUT, if you think Kobe's 12 all-nba defense awards are legit, then I can see why people put him in the top 5 all time.

I am always amused at how so many Kobe stans ignore Duncan though

Duncan has the same amount of rings as Kobe, but more MVPs, more FMVPs, more all-nba defense awards, and the same amount of all-nba teams (15). If we value these accolades highly, then you can argument Kobe isn't even better than Tim Duncan.

[ArbitraryWater]

If we treat all eras equal (i.e Russell/Wilt), then Kobe is in the top 7-10 all time for me. If we remove Russell/Wilt, then Kobe can be top 5-8.

I think the biggest deciding factor in Kobe's ranking is how you view his DEFENSE. If you think he is overrated defensively (I do), then he simply can't be a top five player of all time. BUT, if you think Kobe's 12 all-nba defense awards are legit, then I can see why people put him in the top 5 all time.

I am always amused at how so many Kobe stans ignore Duncan though

Duncan has the same amount of rings as Kobe, but more MVPs, more FMVPs, more all-nba defense awards, and the same amount of all-nba teams (15). If we value these accolades highly, then you can argument Kobe isn't even better than Tim Duncan.


You cant set a standardized measure and then end it with "for me", takes away the purpose of the "if we all account for..."...


but what do you even mean by that? Why would Kobe be 7-10 then?

[RRR3]

Kobe from 1999-2013 had an eFG% of 49%. Birds was 51.5%. Magic was at 53%eFG. Hakeem was 51.6% through 1997. Duncan was 51% through 2013. Wades was 51% through 2014.

What are you imaginining here?


Isiah Thomas? lmao
Why are you using eFG% instead of TS%? You can't just take out FTs if you're measuring efficiency.

[ArbitraryWater]

Why are you using eFG% instead of TS%? You can't just take out FTs if you're measuring efficiency.

TS% completely overvalues FTs. You can just look at the massive difference between eFG% and TS%, it doesnt make any sense.


You can use TS% to coddle him.

But dont come in here and try to tell anyone its superior.


Weve all seen Kobe his whole career or a large portion of it or seen many of his games one way or another... Im now supposed to believe my eyes were deceiving me cause TS% says he was pretty efficient? Sure, he wasnt a net negative by any means, but he was clearly not as efficient as any of the guys I mentioned there.


Kobe also got more bogus FTs than anyone Ive ever seen, another reason why its real easy to just dismiss that for Kobe.

[tpols]

Imagine you spend your whole life playing basketball, get drafted to the NBA out of High School, win 5 rings as an All NBA talent and 4 as MVP caliber amongst countless other accolades...

And some German nerd born in like 1998 who didn't start watching American ball til probably 2010 says you ain't shit and should be ranked dramatically lower than what even the most insane people would declare.

That's what we're dealing with right here folks. :lol

[elementally morale]

Imagine you spend your whole life playing basketball, get drafted to the NBA out of High School, win 5 rings as an All NBA talent and 4 as MVP caliber amongst countless other accolades...

And some German nerd born in like 1998 who didn't start watching American ball til probably 2010 says you ain't shit and should be ranked dramatically lower than what even the most insane people would declare.

That's what we're dealing with right here folks. :lol

Cutting him some slack, I think he does these things mainly to create 'controversy'. I'm not sure this is what he really thinks and I'm not even sure that deep down he 'knows' this to be true. For him it's some hot topics some of the time, which is fine by me. Using a discussion board for... discussion. And if many people disagree it's at least 'a topic'. AW in this sense is someone playing the villain in mainstream media. The guy that has the role to mix things up with some controversial takes. Close to attention whoring but not quite there. The take here AW makes is hard to defend but he does a decent job at it. Does he hate Kobe? I don't think so. Most of Kobe's career had been over by the time AW got into watching basketball. It's just 'something that works' for him. And again, he does a decent job. Does he agree with himself, bullet to the head if not? I'm not sure. But it ain't that important anyway.

[ArbitraryWater]

Imagine you spend your whole life playing basketball, get drafted to the NBA out of High School, win 5 rings as an All NBA talent and 4 as MVP caliber amongst countless other accolades...

And some German nerd born in like 1998 who didn't start watching American ball til probably 2010 says you ain't shit and should be ranked dramatically lower than what even the most insane people would declare.

That's what we're dealing with right here folks. :lol


I hate to break it to you, but a lot of people rank Kobe 15-20 and the more greats like Curry and Kawhi will come, the more Kobe will drop.

When your selling point is "winning 5 rings as an All NBA "talent" ", you already know theres some insecurities going on lol.


Props on the timelines though. Not far off. Im a very analytical viewer, too. I "got it" quick.

[rmt]

If we treat all eras equal (i.e Russell/Wilt), then Kobe is in the top 7-10 all time for me. If we remove Russell/Wilt, then Kobe can be top 5-8.

I think the biggest deciding factor in Kobe's ranking is how you view his DEFENSE. If you think he is overrated defensively (I do), then he simply can't be a top five player of all time. BUT, if you think Kobe's 12 all-nba defense awards are legit, then I can see why people put him in the top 5 all time.

I am always amused at how so many Kobe stans ignore Duncan though

Duncan has the same amount of rings as Kobe, but more MVPs, more FMVPs, more all-nba defense awards, and the same amount of all-nba teams (15). If we value these accolades highly, then you can argument Kobe isn't even better than Tim Duncan.

lol at 12 of Kobe's all-nba defense awards and the word "legit" (as in based on reputation and not performance). IMO, Kobe is at around #10-11 with Hakeem (depending on winning/accolades vs defense/carrying).

But, it never ceases to amaze me how Lakers are gifted these franchise big men (from MEM and NO).

[ArbitraryWater]

lol at Kobe's all-nba defense awards and the word "legit" (as in based on reputation and not performance). IMO, Kobe is at around #10-11 with Hakeem (depending on winning/accolades vs defense/carrying).

But, it never ceases to amaze me how Lakers are gifted these franchise big men (from MEM and NO).


Hakeems 2 rings are like twice as good as Kobes 2 as the man, though. There is nothing interchangeable about them.


That 11th spot was the consensus for a while after his retirement. ESPN and many other outlets then put him 12th, someone else creeped by. As more and more time goes on and the hyperbole wears off, I have a hard time seperating Kobe from someone like Barkley. I dont have him in front of Curry. West. Kawhi.

[John8204]

Purely statistically, Bryant is not among the top 20-25 payers of all time. His situations have been favorable.

Okay...well in the history of the NBA what SG's are you ranking ahead of him? You are going to have to look at guys from his generation...and the history of his position and find 4-5 guys to rank ahead of him.


He was the clear #2 guy on a 3-peat team, in a role many other players could theoretically fill. Nothing about his 2000 or 2002 rings is noteworthy. He played in a big market and was hyped as the next Jordan and this would lay the bueprint to his career and following and fortunate reputation.

Perhaps but he was also #2 when 3-7 where All-Star and Champions in their own right. Kobe was bringing in all of this value. Shaq was getting paid twice what Kobe was making....Kobe didn't make Shaq money until after the two rings.


For very few other players could you make a simple team switch and ask, how much differently would he be revered if he played there?

If Kobe was on a team unfit to win his whole career and he has 0 rings, how much does he really have to show back on?

Is he still a 30K player? He might have done better had he left the Lakers and gone somewhere else where the team was built around him...like Dallas did for Dirk or San Antonio for Duncan. How does Kobe perform if he leaves the tough West and heads to an easier East...teams up with AI, Kidd, or Pierce. How does Kobe perform if he doesn't have to carry a poorly conditioned big that only wants to give effort in the playoffs?


Then hes on his own, does his thing, gets team to low playoff seeds, doesnt do anything spectaculary in the playoffs and loses as underdog, as he usually did, never breaking the barrier.

Then he does win 2 rings on "his own", but being honest he was not better than James or Wade both those years. He was the only top 5 payer in the league with an all star teammate, so the seas basically parted for him. Top 5 payer + a star teammate is a almost historical requirement for a title. He drops off very quick after those b2b titles.

In five years they won the division five made three finals appearances then they tried to do the Super team thing and that blew up.


Nowadays with the huge talent influx, there are 2-3 SGs producing and outproducing Bryant, that game wise show little to no deficit, but theyre not in the same situation, or market, and no one would dare of hyping them up top 10 a time.


Which SG's were willing to make the economic sacrifices Kobe made? We aren't seeing SG led teams make championship run after championship run.


The ony time Kobe truly looked GOAT/top 10 ish was 2002/2003. The 2001 playoffs. And the 2006-2008 span could be argued. 2 years of which were peak volume scoring with little defense in one of the most inflated seasons ever (2006). 2008 was very mature and he lived up to his end of the bargain.

Purely game wise, production, impact, taken as a single unit, it seems Kobe Bryant does not necessarily fit to be among maybe the top 20 greatest payers ever.


I agree Kobe isn't a GOAT but not top ten I don't agree with...he was better than KG, Dirk, Duncan, AI, Kidd, Nash and Shaq. But like I said you have to name players at Kobe's position you are ranking ahead of him all-time.



But of course that seems weird to say over a guy who led 2 teams to championships (though in the future this will be the norm since even in just 50 years, 25+ payers will have led tite teams).

He was the captain on all five of those teams...so you may feel like being the 2 option on those teams invalidates them. Shaq tried winning with MVP's and couldn't do it...fit matters.


There isnt even much Longevity to speak of. Longevity should refer not just to playing, but to playing at a serviceable level. When we enter ATG standards, Kobe has like 8 superstar seasons. Even in his usual prime window from 2000-2013, he had shoddy off years in there (2004, 2005) which are quite frankly beneath that of a top 25 all time caliber player.

I'd say those were years he wasn't successful he still put up franchise leading numbers...7 finals appearences so you are saying he had 1 season of serviceable play that he didn't make the finales. Does that really sound right to you?



A nice scorer, selfish chucker, poor shot selection/efficiency, always covered by top rebounding squads and proportionally great supporting casts (relative to league average), little to no playmaking besides entry passes, became a lazy defender very early on, and was not often a good locker room influence and constantly made it tough on teammates. I forgot who it was who said he was really lucky it was Gasol who they traded for, he was just about the only one who woud have taken a his shit.

But he did lead 2 tite teams, was a top 5 player for about 10 years, and just a scoring machine.

It wasn't luck it was Jerry West who treated Kobe like a son to him that traded Gasol (and likely mentored him) to arrange that marriage.

[John8204]

And just to point out...I have Kobe at #9 one spot behind George Mikan at #8.

[BlackMamba8]

only idiots in here have kobe ranked so low......you are idiots....people who played against kobe always say hes right behind jordan....be gone you idiots

[rmt]

Hakeems 2 rings are like twice as good as Kobes 2 as the man, though. There is nothing interchangeable about them.


That 11th spot was the consensus for a while after his retirement. ESPN and many other outlets then put him 12th, someone else creeped by. As more and more time goes on and the hyperbole wears off, I have a hard time seperating Kobe from someone like Barkley. I dont have him in front of Curry. West. Kawhi.

Kawhi - I'll give him his TOR ring and outstanding defense, but IMO he's too injury-prone and doesn't play enough to be in front of Kobe (or many people who put in the work night after night, year after year - it's like the regular season doesn't exist for him - only the playoffs - that's like cheating just preparing/playing for playoffs).

5 rings is plenty to separate him from Barkley.

No comment on West as I didn't watch him play.

[Baller234]

He's arguably the greatest player to ever to step foot onto a basketball court after Jordan. There's really only a small handful of guys who have a case over him.

Stats exist purely for reference. This obsession with "efficiency" has been nothing but a detriment to basketball analysis. If you're seriously debating as to whether or not Kobe is top 10 or god forbid top 20, just log off and delete your username.

[BarberSchool]

In terms of pure 1-on-1 scoring talent, he’s top 3.

In terms of overall talent and accomplishments on the squads he played for, borderline top ten.

But Kobe gets a 1-2 slot boost due to early tragic death.

[1987_Lakers]

He's arguably the greatest player to ever to step foot onto a basketball court after Jordan. There's really only a small handful of guys who have a case over him.

Stats exist purely for reference. This obsession with "efficiency" has been nothing but a detriment to basketball analysis. If you're seriously debating as to whether or not Kobe is top 10 or god forbid top 20, just log off and delete your username.

As someone who watched Kobe for his entire prime years, this post is just pure comedy. :oldlol:

The only thing he has a case for is being one of the greatest scorers to ever step on the court, at his peak, he was an animal of a scorer, actually had more range on his shot than MJ, also a better ball-handler, but he never really reached MJ's athletic ability and was a poor shot selector at times.

The knock on Kobe is that besides scoring, he didn't really provide much to other aspects of the game compared to other all-time greats like LeBron. He was actually a top tier defender during the 1st 3 peat, but by '03 up until he retired, his defense was nothing to right home about. He could man you up when he was serious, but he was often out of position and was even criticized by Phil Jackson for his lack of defense by 2004 or so. Him making a bunch of all-defensive teams was strictly a reputation award. It was a running joke among all fans. He wasn't really known for his passing, he was a capable passer for sure, but for the most part he was known as a "do it yourself" player and got some criticism for selfishness.

And what gets swept under the rug about Kobe is his performances in big games. He was flat out bad in game 7's, closeout games, and had some pretty underwhelming Finals, guys like MJ & LeBron blow him out of the water in those categories.

[iamgine]

I find Kobe's shot selection horrible but the guy had huge impact, even during his sidekick years.

[Soundwave]

I have kind of have this metric when looking at the top 10 which is "could you put this guy in a game with other top 10 players and would they stand out/dominate without much fuss" ... with Kobe I think the answer is yes.

He is the 2nd greatest offensive weapon the sport has ever seen and wasn't shy about it either, to me that just puts him in the top 10.

You can't be that skilled, that competetive, and then also have the pre-requisite champions on resume (5) and not be in the top 10.

He's an explosive talent, no doubt about it.

I'll be honest I don't think it's a given that Magic/Bird are better than him, those two get a boost because they "saved the league", but that's using a marketing reason to rank players, in terms of ability I think he's the same level as them and not that far off from Jordan and LeBron.

[Baller234]

As someone who watched Kobe for his entire prime years, this post is just pure comedy. :oldlol:

The only thing he has a case for is being one of the greatest scorers to ever step on the court, at his peak, he was an animal of a scorer, actually had more range on his shot than MJ, also a better ball-handler, but he never really reached MJ's athletic ability and was a poor shot selector at times.

The knock on Kobe is that besides scoring, he didn't really provide much to other aspects of the game compared to other all-time greats like LeBron. He was actually a top tier defender during the 1st 3 peat, but by '03 up until he retired, his defense was nothing to right home about. He could man you up when he was serious, but he was often out of position and was even criticized by Phil Jackson for his lack of defense by 2004 or so. Him making a bunch of all-defensive teams was strictly a reputation award. It was a running joke among all fans. He wasn't really known for his passing, he was a capable passer for sure, but for the most part he was known as a "do it yourself" player and got some criticism for selfishness.

And what gets swept under the rug about Kobe is his performances in big games. He was flat out bad in game 7's, closeout games, and had some pretty underwhelming Finals, guys like MJ & LeBron blow him out of the water in those categories.

Lmao you're gonna critcize Kobe for bad finals games while propping up Lebron? A guy who choked away an entire series against an inferior team because he was put in a box offensively and couldn't do jack shit? :oldlol:

Kobe was a leader, a tone setter and an unstoppable scorer. He had his bad games but he had more great games. Like everyone else he needed a good team to compete. The Lakers were floundering and literally the moment they got Gasol they went to three straight finals and won two of them. If you argument against Kobe is that he wasn't perfect at all times, that's a terrible argument. Especially if you're using it to prop up someone like Lebron who also has his fair share of disasters.

[1987_Lakers]

Lmao you're gonna critcize Kobe for bad finals games while propping up Lebron? A guy who choked away an entire series against an inferior team because he was put in a box offensively and couldn't do jack shit? :oldlol:.

Are you serious?

LeBron's Finals numbers: 28|10|8 on 48 fg%

Kobe's Finals numbers: 25|6|5 on 41 fg%


I already know what your response will be. "But stats don't mean anything".

I watched all of Kobe's Finals. He really only had 2 Finals where you could say he played pretty well, being 2002 and 2009.

He sucked in 2000, was decent in 2001. Horrfic in '04 and pretty mediocre in '08 & '10 for the most part.


LeBron has played up to his standards in every Finals he played in with the exeption of '07 and '11.

[ImKobe]

Are you serious?

LeBron's Finals numbers: 28|10|8 on 48 fg%

Kobe's Finals numbers: 25|6|5 on 41 fg%


I already know what your response will be. "But stats don't mean anything".

I watched all of Kobe's Finals. He really only had 2 Finals where you could say he played pretty well, being 2002 and 2009.

He sucked in 2000, was decent in 2001. Horrfic in '04 and pretty mediocre in '08 & '10 for the most part.

LeBron has played up to his standards in every Finals he played in with the exeption of '07 and '11.

Oh lol this is such bs revisionist history. 2000 he obviously got injured but still played a key role in winning the series
2001 was good/great besides 1 game
2010 he was good/great in 5 out of 7, and he averaged 30/7/4/2/1 55.6%TS through 6 games but apparently he was mediocre by ur standards because of one bad shooting game at the end? That series should have been over in 6 but they lost 2 out of 3 in games where he put up 29, 33 & 38 points (33.3 ppg 56.15%TS) @ Boston as Gasol played below his standard in all 3 games.

So Lebron apparently was great in 2013, but averaged 16.7 ppg on 44.23%TS through his first 3 games and ended with 25.3 ppg on 52.9%TS for the series, which somehow is apparently a lot better than Kobe averaging 28.6 ppg on 52.8%TS in 2010. And yes, Lebron had a great G7, but he did everything to lose that series in Game 6 in that 4th quarter until he got bailed out, so if we're being honest he was good or great in 3 out of 7 games at best.

[1987_Lakers]

Oh lol this is such bs revisionist history. 2000 he obviously got injured but still played a key role in winning the series
2001 was good/great besides 1 game
2010 he was good/great in 5 out of 7, and he averaged 30/7/4/2/1 55.6%TS through 6 games but apparently he was mediocre by ur standards because of one bad shooting game at the end? That series should have been over in 6 but they lost 2 out of 3 in games where he put up 29, 33 & 38 points (33.3 ppg 56.15%TS) @ Boston as Gasol played below his standard in all 3 games.

So Lebron apparently was great in 2013, but averaged 16.7 ppg on 44.23%TS through his first 3 games and ended with 25.3 ppg on 52.9%TS for the series, which somehow is apparently a lot better than Kobe averaging 28.6 ppg on 52.8%TS in 2010. And yes, Lebron had a great G7, but he did everything to lose that series in Game 6 in that 4th quarter until he got bailed out, so if we're being honest he was good or great in 3 out of 7 games at best.

Look how you nitpick shit. "Through 5 games". "If you take out game 1"

Fact is in game 7 vs Boston Kobe shot 6-24 and had the worst game 7 a superstar ever had.

LeBron in games 6/7 vs Spurs in 2013 were historic. Scored like 16 points in the 4th quarter in game 6 when Miami was losing that game. Had a monster game in game 7.

Series are not decided through 4 or 5 games, they are decided when they are over.

What LeBron did in the 2016 Finals destroys anything Kobe ever did in any Finals.

[Baller234]

@1987 Lakers

I'm not going to argue with over Kobe and Lebron. I think Kobe was better but I don't think choosing Lebron is blasphemy. He obviously also has a case as one of the best to ever to do it.

The problem is when people pretend that Kobe is Carmelo Anthony and doesn't belong anywhere near the GOAT discussion, or when they insist he's not even top 10.

[dankok8]

I had him 8th on my last list but really it's a range. I can see anywhere from about 5th to 12th.

[tpols]

Look how you nitpick shit. "Through 5 games". "If you take out game 1"

Fact is in game 7 vs Boston Kobe shot 6-24 and had the worst game 7 a superstar ever had.

LeBron in games 6/7 vs Spurs in 2013 were historic. Scored like 16 points in the 4th quarter in game 6 when Miami was losing that game. Had a monster game in game 7.

Series are not decided through 4 or 5 games, they are decided when they are over.

What LeBron did in the 2016 Finals destroys anything Kobe ever did in any Finals.

Lebron was a shot away from 2013 being another 2011.

Ray saved his legacy because up to that point Pop had employed the "sag defense" and limited him. Everybody forgot about boris diaw memes because of Rays shot. Bron basically went off only after Ray flipped the momentum and snatched victory from the certain Jaws of defeat.

Then the Heat went on to get blown out by the biggest margin of victory in NBA Finals history the next year besides Lebrons loss to the warriors in 2018.

Lebron literally holds records for being blown out after team hopping all around the league. :roll:

Even internationally outside the NBA brand Lebron was on bronze teams and needed Kobe to go off in The Championship game vs Spain to win Gold.

Kobe was just... better at basketball.

[rmt]

@1987 Lakers

I'm not going to argue with over Kobe and Lebron. I think Kobe was better but I don't think choosing Lebron is blasphemy. He obviously also has a case as one of the best to ever to do it.

The problem is when people pretend that Kobe is Carmelo Anthony and doesn't belong anywhere near the GOAT discussion, or when they insist he's not even top 10.

It's just recency bias - Kawhi over Kobe is IMO sheer lunacy though.

[ImKobe]

Look how you nitpick shit. "Through 5 games". "If you take out game 1"

Fact is in game 7 vs Boston Kobe shot 6-24 and had the worst game 7 a superstar ever had.

LeBron in games 6/7 vs Spurs in 2013 were historic. Scored like 16 points in the 4th quarter in game 6 when Miami was losing that game. Had a monster game in game 7.

Series are not decided through 4 or 5 games, they are decided when they are over.

What LeBron did in the 2016 Finals destroys anything Kobe ever did in any Finals.

Well how else are you supposed to evaluate series? If Lebron played like shit in 3-4 games out of a series, is it really considered that great? It's okay, ATGs have bad games in wins all the time, doesn't mean that Lebron's 2013 ring is worth any less, all the trolling aside.

Idk how a Kobe hater such as yourself would ever make an issue out of "nitpicking" when that's all you guys have been doing since 2010... y'all act like G7 is how Kobe played that entire series when he had been great up to that point. You could argue he was even better through 6 games of that 2010 series than the year before vs. Orlando.

And if I wanted to nitpick further I'd give you shit for saying that Bran's 2015 and 2016 series were great by his standards as well.. he clearly had a bunch of bad games in those series. 2016 was a lot like 2013 in that regard because his poor play is really what put them in a hole to begin with, but we don't discredit that ring for it. Idk what y'all need to do that shit with all of Kobe's rings consistently.

[1987_Lakers]

Well how else are you supposed to evaluate series? If Lebron played like shit in 3-4 games out of a series, is it really considered that great? It's okay, ATGs have bad games in wins all the time, doesn't mean that Lebron's 2013 ring is worth any less, all the trolling aside.

Idk how a Kobe hater such as yourself would ever make an issue out of "nitpicking" when that's all you guys have been doing since 2010... y'all act like G7 is how Kobe played that entire series when he had been great up to that point. You could argue he was even better through 6 games of that 2010 series than the year before vs. Orlando.

And if I wanted to nitpick further I'd give you shit for saying that Bran's 2015 and 2016 series were great by his standards as well.. he clearly had a bunch of bad games in those series. 2016 was a lot like 2013 in that regard because his poor play is really what put them in a hole to begin with, but we don't discredit that ring for it. Idk what y'all need to do that shit with all of Kobe's rings consistently.

Here are Kobe's finals stats

2000 - 15.6 ppg | 39 fg%

2001 - 24 ppg | 41.5 fg% | 50 TS%

2002 - 27 ppg | 51 fg% | 62 TS%

2004 - 23 ppg | 38 fg% | 46 TS%

2008 - 26 ppg | 40.1 fg% | 50.5 TS%

2009 - 32 ppg | 43 fg% | 52.5 TS%

2010 - 29 ppg | 40.1 fg% | 52.8 TS%



Here are Kobe's game seven stats.

44.2 MPG

22.2 points

FG 38.9%

FT 67.3%

8 RPG

5 APG

1 SPG

1.3 BPG





Here are Kobe's stats when facing elimination.



22.3 PPG

5.8 RPG


3.5 APG

1.3 SPG

1.3 BPG

on a 50.3 TS

and his teams went 9-10 in those games.

[ImKobe]

..


Exactly. A bot reply whenever you're cornered and have nothing of value to add. Pathetic manchild.

[1987_Lakers]

Exactly. A bot reply whenever you're cornered and have nothing of value to add. Pathetic manchild.

I show you nothing but facts and you can't handle it.

Look how you censored my quote.

Somebody is hurt. :oldlol:

[tontoz]

Kobes shot selection puts him outside the top ten for me. He probably took more bad shots then anyone I've ever seen, at least in terms of total volume. It was frequently hard to watch.

I remember on game against a weak wizards team kobe went off in the first half and the Lakers had a big lead. In the second half the wizards doubled Kobe a lot but he kept shooting and of course missing instead of passing, allowing the wizards to come back and win.

After the game nick young was quoted as saying they knew Kobe wasn't going to pass so they could double him aggressively.

It was vintage Kobe.

[warriorfan]

Well how else are you supposed to evaluate series? If Lebron played like shit in 3-4 games out of a series, is it really considered that great? It's okay, ATGs have bad games in wins all the time, doesn't mean that Lebron's 2013 ring is worth any less, all the trolling aside.

Idk how a Kobe hater such as yourself would ever make an issue out of "nitpicking" when that's all you guys have been doing since 2010... y'all act like G7 is how Kobe played that entire series when he had been great up to that point. You could argue he was even better through 6 games of that 2010 series than the year before vs. Orlando.

And if I wanted to nitpick further I'd give you shit for saying that Bran's 2015 and 2016 series were great by his standards as well.. he clearly had a bunch of bad games in those series. 2016 was a lot like 2013 in that regard because his poor play is really what put them in a hole to begin with, but we don't discredit that ring for it. Idk what y'all need to do that shit with all of Kobe's rings consistently.

Kobe played well in game 7 vs boston. It was a super tight and grimy low scoring game. Kobe brought it big on the boards and on defense. Was a beyond the boxscore game for sure.

[1987_Lakers]

Kobes shot selection puts him outside the top ten for me. He probably took more bad shots then anyone I've ever seen, at least in terms of total volume. It was frequently hard to watch.

I remember on game against a weak wizards team koby went off in the first half and.the Lakers had a big lead at the half. I the second half the wizards doubled Kobe a lot but he kept shooting and of course missing instead of passing, allowing the wizards to come back and win..

After the game nick young was quoted as saying they knew Kobe wasn't going to pass so they could double him aggressively.

It was vintage Kobe.

This is exactly what happened in game 7 vs Boston, luckily the other guys were able to bail him out.

I remember Denver trying a similar strategy in game 7 of 2012, but Kobe was finally smart about it and passed the ball a bit more

[warriorfan]

Kobes shot selection puts him outside the top ten for me. He probably took more bad shots then anyone I've ever seen, at least in terms of total volume. It was frequently hard to watch.

I remember on game against a weak wizards team kobe went off in the first half and the Lakers had a big lead. In the second half the wizards doubled Kobe a lot but he kept shooting and of course missing instead of passing, allowing the wizards to come back and win.

After the game nick young was quoted as saying they knew Kobe wasn't going to pass so they could double him aggressively.

It was vintage Kobe.

If you haven’t seen the thinking basketball on Kobe it’s pretty good. But he breaks down statistics that shows his shot selection wasn’t as detrimental as it might appear on the surface. there are certain games where he shot them out of the game for sure but overall it wasn’t a huge as negative as it might seem

[ArbitraryWater]

It's just recency bias - Kawhi over Kobe is IMO sheer lunacy though.

Do you ever invoke an argument into your statement?


Why cant Kawhi be ranked above Kobe?

[ArbitraryWater]

Its best to not even entertain the nitpicking goat (ImKobe)

[ArbitraryWater]

Kobe played well in game 7 vs boston. It was a super tight and grimy low scoring game. Kobe brought it big on the boards and on defense. Was a beyond the boxscore game for sure.

The boxscore tells you it was a tight, grimy low scoring game and that Kobe was on the boards, dumbass.


Yeah he brought it on defense by sagging 5 ft off Rondo every possession to save energy for his shotmaking on offense.

[ArbitraryWater]

You could argue he was even better through 6 games of that 2010 series than the year before vs. Orlando

Thats huge that before he shot 6/24 he might have been better than when he shot 43% the previous year.

[ArbitraryWater]

Kawhi - I'll give him his TOR ring and outstanding defense, but IMO he's too injury-prone and doesn't play enough to be in front of Kobe (or many people who put in the work night after night, year after year - it's like the regular season doesn't exist for him - only the playoffs - that's like cheating just preparing/playing for playoffs).

5 rings is plenty to separate him from Barkley.

No comment on West as I didn't watch him play.


You can look at rings last.

They have absolutely no value if you just go by them without first evaluating if the play to acquire those rings was higher and the reason for why that player has rings and the other does not.


Youre still too warped in the ringz universe.

[ArbitraryWater]

He's arguably the greatest player to ever to step foot onto a basketball court after Jordan. There's really only a small handful of guys who have a case over him.

Stats exist purely for reference. This obsession with "efficiency" has been nothing but a detriment to basketball analysis. If you're seriously debating as to whether or not Kobe is top 10 or god forbid top 20, just log off and delete your username.

No argument, as expected.


Yeah, I bet coaches dont care about their players being efficient either, right?

Makes no difference to them between deciding to start Player A or Player B.


:oldlol::facepalm


Stick to the OTC griffith

[warriorfan]

The boxscore tells you it was a tight, grimy low scoring game and that Kobe was on the boards, dumbass.


Yeah he brought it on defense by sagging 5 ft off Rondo every possession to save energy for his shotmaking on offense.

he made the adjustment to sag off of rondo to dare him to shoot because that was by far the weakest part of his game and it allowed him to cover a lot more space for help defense, and it worked.

you are talking to someone who watched the full game live, you aren’t gonna pass any bullshit off to me

[tontoz]

If you haven’t seen the thinking basketball on Kobe it’s pretty good. But he breaks down statistics that shows his shot selection wasn’t as detrimental as it might appear on the surface. there are certain games where he shot them out of the game for sure but overall it wasn’t a huge as negative as it might seem


In the finals the Pistons defensive game plan was centered around Kobe's selfishness. They put Wallace on Shaq without help knowing Ben couldn't guard him. They bet that Kobe wouldn't be willing to give the ball up enough to make them pay for it.

[tpols]

In the finals the Pistons defensive game plan was centered around Kobe's selfishness. They put Wallace on Shaq without help knowing Ben couldn't guard him. They bet that Kobe wouldn't be willing to give the ball up enough to make them pay for it.

If you judge everybody by their worst series everybody would be considered a scrub except for Mike Jordan and Bill Russell.

[tontoz]

If you judge everybody by their worst series everybody would be considered a scrub except for Mike Jordan and Bill Russell.


It wasn't an issue of having a bad series. It was the fact that the opponents game plan was centered around his selfishness. And it worked.

The Pistons didn't just randomly decide to play that way. They did it based on Kobes history.

It isn't a case of someone just going through a shooting slump or facing a bad matchup. It was a case of Kobe being extremely selfish.

[tpols]

The Lakers ORTGs post Shaq were

2006 - 8th offensive rank, 9th in team assists
2007 - 7th offensive rank, 6th in team assists
2008 - 3rd offensive rank, 4th in team assists (pre-Pau)
2009 - 3rd offensive rank, 2nd in team assists
2010 - 11th offensive rank, 15th in team assists


For somebody who didn't pass the ball, Kobe sure was the headliner for top assist teams and he led 5 championships in dimes.

Kobe probably has the most assists in Lakers history outside Magic Johnson.

A lot of you guys just don't live in reality.

[tpols]

It wasn't an issue of having a bad series. It was the fact that the opponents game plan was centered around his selfishness. And it worked.

The Pistons didn't just randomly decide to play that way. They did it based on Kobes history.

It isn't a case of someone just going through a shooting slump or facing a bad matchup. It was a case of Kobe being extremely selfish.

And yet we've seen just as bad from Lebron in 2011 where he refused to shoot and cratered his team in a huge upset loss (factually by the odds and context). Yet a lot of people still have him top 5 GOAT.

Kobe would've been by far the best player in your franchises history, but you're biased.

You kind of remind me of Xiao who said he would take Gobert over Kobe or Kidd.

It's just... purely irrational and not looking at the whole scope of things.

[tontoz]

The Lakers ORTGs post Shaq were

2006 - 8th offensive rank, 9th in team assists
2007 - 7th offensive rank, 6th in team assists
2008 - 3rd offensive rank, 4th in team assists (pre-Pau)
2009 - 3rd offensive rank, 2nd in team assists
2010 - 11th offensive rank, 15th in team assists


For somebody who didn't pass the ball, Kobe sure was the headliner for top assist teams and he led 5 championships in dimes.

Kobe probably has the most assists in Lakers history outside Magic Johnson.

A lot of you guys just don't live in reality.


The reality is that Kobes high in his prime was 6 assists per game. He played 40.7 minutes per game that year and was 3rd in usage rate.

The team had a high assist rate because of Phil Jackson, not Kobe.

[tpols]

The reality is that Kobes career high was 6 assists per game. He played 40.7 minutes per game that year and was 3rd in usage rate.

The team had a high assist rate because of Phil Jackson, not Kobe.

You're an idiot if you think Phil was more responsible for the Lakers success than Kobe. Just like you'd be an idiot so say he was more responsible for the Bulls success than MJ.

The triangle wasn't Phil's concoction. He stole it off Tex Winter.

[tontoz]

You're an idiot if you think Phil was more responsible for the Lakers success than Kobe. Just like you'd be an idiot so say he was more responsible for the Bulls success than MJ.

The triangle wasn't Phil's concoction. He stole it off Tex Winter.



I didn't say their success was due to Phil, I said he was responsible for their high number of assists. RIF

It doesn't matter who created the offense. As the head coach it was his decision what offense to run.

[dankok8]

I agree that Kobe is a lot better than his stats because efficiency depends on the shots you take. He was his team's designated tough shot taker which cratered his efficiency but looking at different categories of scoring, he looks pretty elite. Case in point iso scoring which comprises over a third of his attempts and he converts at 88th percentile. Also if you look at different areas of the floor, you can see he's anywhere from above average to superb in just about all of them.

https://i.postimg.cc/zGhDwXfq/Kobe-Bryant-Playtype-2006-2010.jpg

https://i.postimg.cc/DzgT5W33/Kobe-Bryant-06-10.jpg

[ImKobe]

The reality is that Kobes career high was 6 assists per game. He played 40.7 minutes per game that year and was 3rd in usage rate.

The team had a high assist rate because of Phil Jackson, not Kobe.

Yes, because Kobe wasn't a great passer and didn't have a bunch of hockey assists and passes that led to FTs for his bigs due to the triangle lol. Phil surely didn't say that KB was the best playmaker he had ever coached (better than Pip and MJ), right?

In 2013 under D'antoni, Kobe made the switch to PG mid-season (he was averaging 29.2 ppg on 57.18%TS through 42 games) with injuries & all and averaged 7.5 assists per game for a 36-game stretch until he tore his achilles.

[elementally morale]

The triangle wasn't Phil's concoction. He stole it off Tex Winter.

Steal? They were coaching the same team.

Anyway, this thread goes as expected. People who played with and against Kobe do and will have him in their top 10. The general public has him there, too. Fans of 'his era', people who are 40-55 now, more often than not have him in their top 10 (let alone 20). The new generation not necessarily. Thankfully, it doesn't change our memories.

[tontoz]

I agree that Kobe is a lot better than his stats because efficiency depends on the shots you take. He was his team's designated tough shot taker which cratered his efficiency but looking at different categories of scoring, he looks pretty elite. Case in point iso scoring which comprises over a third of his attempts and he converts at 88th percentile. Also if you look at different areas of the floor, you can see he's anywhere from above average to superb in just about all of them.

https://i.postimg.cc/zGhDwXfq/Kobe-Bryant-Playtype-2006-2010.jpg

https://i.postimg.cc/DzgT5W33/Kobe-Bryant-06-10.jpg


The problem was that a lot of those tough shots were taken with plenty of time on the clock. He loved taking long, contested jumpers.

[tpols]

Yes, because Kobe wasn't a great passer and didn't have a bunch of hockey assists and passes that led to FTs for his bigs due to the triangle lol. Phil surely didn't say that KB was the best playmaker he had ever coached (better than Pip and MJ), right?

In 2013 under D'antoni, Kobe made the switch to PG mid-season (he was averaging 29.2 ppg on 57.18%TS through 42 games) with injuries & all and averaged 7.5 assists per game for a 36-game stretch until he tore his achilles.

Good point.

Kobe averaged more dimes under Dantoni than Phil, yet the Lakers were only the 17th ranked assist team.

So his production in the triangle despite being superb is actually deflated.

If we let him play in a dumbed down system and "westbrook" it he'd have even more dimes than the most in Lakers history outside Magic, but the team would've been worse off for it.

[tontoz]

With Kobes size, athleticism and skill why didn't he have at least one season with a TS of 60%? :confusedshrug:

That isn't exactly a high bar and he never even got close.

[Xiao Yao You]

And yet we've seen just as bad from Lebron in 2011 where he refused to shoot and cratered his team in a huge upset loss (factually by the odds and context). Yet a lot of people still have him top 5 GOAT.

Kobe would've been by far the best player in your franchises history, but you're biased.

You kind of remind me of Xiao who said he would take Gobert over Kobe or Kidd.

It's just... purely irrational and not looking at the whole scope of things.

I never said that but I wouldn't expect anything less on ISH :facepalm

[rmt]

Do you ever invoke an argument into your statement?


Why cant Kawhi be ranked above Kobe?

Did you miss my post that KL just doesn't play enough?

He has 2 rings - one averaging only 12.9/6.2 in RS and 14.3/6.7 in playoffs (he did have a great last 3 games of the Finals but 9/2 in both of the first two games). I gave him his props for TOR ring and his defense but in total - not anywhere near to jump over the entirety of Kobe's career.

[rmt]

You can look at rings last.

They have absolutely no value if you just go by them without first evaluating if the play to acquire those rings was higher and the reason for why that player has rings and the other does not.


Youre still too warped in the ringz universe.

Did you read my post where I have Kobe and Hakeem interchangeable at 10-11? That's 5 rings vs 2 rings with great individual play/defense/carrying.

And you place too little value on rings. How many great players have there been? How else is one supposed to evaluate them? The top 10 players have all had great individual play IN ADDITION to rings. If not for Ray's 3, Lebron would have 3 rings and 3 FMVP - Duncan would probably have 6 rings with 4 FMVPs. Would anyone then rank Lebron above Duncan?

[3ba11]

30 ppg in the triangle is the greatest demonstration of basketball skill that I've ever seen from a perimeter player - it requires goat jumpshooting skill and post play coupled with no ball-domination and low turnovers

I've never heard of or seen a better demonstration of basketball skill and ability.. It elevated teammates, chemistry, coaching and ultimately team ceiling/Finals records - it was capable of winning the most with the least (repeating with a 1x all-star)

[StrongLurk]

30 ppg in the triangle is the greatest demonstration of basketball skill that I've ever seen from a perimeter player - it requires goat jumpshooting skill and post play coupled with no ball-domination and low turnovers

I've never heard of or seen a better demonstration of basketball skill and ability.. It elevated teammates, chemistry, coaching and ultimately team ceiling/Finals records - it was capable of winning the most with the least (repeating with a 1x all-star)

Shaq peaked higher in the "triangle" than Kobe did.

[ArbitraryWater]

Did you read my post where I have Kobe and Hakeem interchangeable at 10-11? That's 5 rings vs 2 rings with great individual play/defense/carrying.

And you place too little value on rings. How many great players have there been? How else is one supposed to evaluate them? The top 10 players have all had great individual play IN ADDITION to rings. If not for Ray's 3, Lebron would have 3 rings and 3 FMVP - Duncan would probably have 6 rings with 4 FMVPs. Would anyone then rank Lebron above Duncan?


Only people not interested in doing the proper work will put heavy emphasis on rings. Its the simpletons go-to. Sorry.

They dont mean anything in-and-of-themself and theres nothing you can do to change that.




Ive seen Kobe dribble the clock all the way down on so many occasions that Id be dishonest to mysef if I was trying to spread this absurd "he always took the teams late shots!" narrative.

Its hilarious that his supporters decided to go with that as reason for his inefficiency.

[ArbitraryWater]

he made the adjustment to sag off of rondo to dare him to shoot because that was by far the weakest part of his game and it allowed him to cover a lot more space for help defense, and it worked.

you are talking to someone who watched the full game live, you aren’t gonna pass any bullshit off to me


No shit, but how do you take away that "he brought it big on defense" when he chose an assignment that allowed him to sag off a player?


Do you not have basic intelligence?

[Baller234]

No argument, as expected.


Yeah, I bet coaches dont care about their players being efficient either, right?

Makes no difference to them between deciding to start Player A or Player B.


:oldlol::facepalm


Stick to the OTC griffith

No you're right, efficiency is everything. The most efficient player is the best player always and without exception.That's why Shaq is the greatest player of all time. Even better than Lebron. Nobody was more efficient than Shaq on a regular basis.

Career FG%

Lebron - .505
Shaq - .582

Yikes, Lebron's not even close.

Sorry, the efficiency gods have spoken and judging from the numbers Lebron is not even on the Mt. Rushmore.

[1987_Lakers]

No you're right, efficiency is everything. The most efficient player is the best player always and without exception.That's why Shaq is the greatest player of all time. Even better than Lebron. Nobody was more efficient than Shaq on a regular basis.

Career FG%

Lebron - .505
Shaq - .582

Yikes, Lebron's not even close.

Sorry, the efficiency gods have spoken and judging from the numbers Lebron is not even on the Mt. Rushmore.

Shaq was like a 50% free throw shooter, that drastically cut his efficiency. Shaq & LeBron's TS% are pretty much equal to each other.

[RRR3]

Shaq was like a 50% free throw shooter, that drastically cut his efficiency. Shaq & LeBron's TS% are pretty much equal to each other.
Bodybagged :oldlol:

Bawler should stick to raving about trans people, he is clueless about basketball. "Kobe top 2 all time" :roll:

[Baller234]

Shaq was like a 50% free throw shooter, that drastically cut his efficiency. Shaq & LeBron's TS% are pretty much equal to each other.

Oh, so now free throws matter? I thought efficiency was the be all and end all? What happened?

Who's a better free throw shooter? Kobe or Lebron? Who's more likely to ice the game from the free throw line?

[1987_Lakers]

Oh, so now free throws matter? I thought efficiency was the be all and end all? What happened?

Who's a better free throw shooter? Kobe or Lebron? Who's more likely to ice the game from the free throw line?

TS% factors fg%, 3pt%, & ft%. It's the best way to judge someone's efficiency. And LeBron also blows Kobe out of the water in that department.

[1987_Lakers]

@1987 Lakers

I'm not going to argue with over Kobe and Lebron. I think Kobe was better but I don't think choosing Lebron is blasphemy. He obviously also has a case as one of the best to ever to do it.

The problem is when people pretend that Kobe is Carmelo Anthony and doesn't belong anywhere near the GOAT discussion, or when they insist he's not even top 10.

It's obvious to pretty much everyone that Kobe was a tier ahead of Carmelo, but he doesn't belong anywhere near the GOAT convo and ranking him just outside the top 10 is pretty reasonable.

[Baller234]

TS% factors fg%, 3pt%, & ft%. It's the best way to judge someone's efficiency. And LeBron also blows Kobe out of the water in that department.

Oh wow, you went to made up advanced statistics. What good is TS% when you're shooting free throws to ice the game? How come these invented statistics are only relevant when you want it to be?

And even if we were to play your game, Lebron's career TS% is .58 and Kobe's is .55. Oh wow, a whole 3% difference. I guess that's sure fire proof that Lebron was the better basketball player.

Also I'm curious, does this logic still apply? It looks like Lebron's highest TS% for a season was .64 back in 2012.

Here are the players who had a higher TS% than that just last season:

- Zion
- Giannis
- Curry
- Durant
- Jokic

I guess considering that these players had more efficient seasons than Lebron had throughout his entire career, they all must be better than Lebron.

:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

[1987_Lakers]

Oh wow, you went to made up advanced statistics. What good is TS% when you're shooting free throws to ice the game? How come these invented statistics are only relevant when you want it to be?

And even if we were to play your game, Lebron's career TS% is .58 and Kobe's is .55. Oh wow, a whole 3% difference. I guess that's sure fire proof that Lebron was the better basketball player.

Also I'm curious, does this logic still apply? It looks like Lebron's highest TS% for a season was .64 back in 2012.

Here are the players who had a higher TS% than that just last season:

- Zion
- Giannis
- Curry
- Durant
- Jokic

I guess considering that these players had more efficient seasons than Lebron had throughout his entire career, they all must be better than Lebron.

:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

You are missing the point, efficiency is a great thing to have, but LeBron's game is simply more versatile than Kobe's. Along with the efficiency, LeBron is arguably the greatest passing forward ever along with Bird, at his defensive peak he was more impactful than Kobe and to top it off his longevity is simply a tier above his. It's pretty much impossible to have Kobe ranked ahead of him, I haven't seen any list have Kobe ahead of LeBron since 2016.

This site had a top 75 players ever project a couple of years ago and Kobe came in at #11.
Realgm had Kobe at #12 in 2020.

Whether you like it or not, your whole "Kobe is in the GOAT convo" belief is a claim that isn't agreed upon by most fans.

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=2004777

[Baller234]

You are missing the point, efficiency is a great thing to have, but LeBron's game is simply more versatile than Kobe's. Along with the efficiency, LeBron is arguably the greatest passing forward ever along with Bird, at his defensive peak he was more impactful than Kobe and to top it off his longevity is simply a tier above his. It's pretty much impossible to have Kobe ranked ahead of him, I haven't seen any list have Kobe ahead of LeBron since 2016.

This site had a top 75 players ever project a couple of years ago and Kobe came in at #11.
Realgm had Kobe at #12 in 2020.

Whether you like it or not, your whole "Kobe is in the GOAT convo" belief is a claim that isn't agreed upon by most fans.

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=2004777

Wait I'm confused.

Before it was "Lebron is better because of efficiency".

Then when that logic was turned on it's head, the argument transformed into "Lebron is better because of TS%"

And now that THAT logic got turned on it's head, the argument has transformed yet again. Now it's "Lebron is better because I've seen him ranked higher on other people's lists..."

https://media0.giphy.com/media/J2DYCDA15pTau86IGr/giphy.gif?cid=6c09b9520jazqxtz6a9ob7n3m4erjib6vgf3 7y93hdw11a64&ep=v1_gifs_search&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g

:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

If you really wanna break down skill for skill, Kobe is a far better one on one player and he's also better at playing off the ball. So miss me with all that fake advanced bullshit.

I respect Lebron as one of the all time great players, but his fans are the absolute worst and really don't know about dikk about dikk. It's really just stats stats stats with you guys.

It's close but give me Mamba all day.

[Full Court]

Wait I'm confused.

Before it was "Lebron is better because of efficiency".

Then when that logic was turned on it's head, the argument transformed into "Lebron is better because of TS%"

And now that THAT logic got turned on it's head, the argument has transformed yet again. Now it's "Lebron is better because I've seen him ranked higher on other people's lists..."

https://media0.giphy.com/media/J2DYCDA15pTau86IGr/giphy.gif?cid=6c09b9520jazqxtz6a9ob7n3m4erjib6vgf3 7y93hdw11a64&ep=v1_gifs_search&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g

:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

If you really wanna break down skill for skill, Kobe is a far better one on one player and he's also better at playing off the ball. So miss me with all that fake advanced bullshit.

I respect Lebron as one of the all time great players, but his fans are the absolute worst and really don't know about dikk about dikk. It's really just stats stats stats with you guys.

It's close but give me Mamba all day.

:roll:

Keep in mind, you're arguing with someone who doesn't know what an advanced stat is.

[1987_Lakers]

Wait I'm confused.

Before it was "Lebron is better because of efficiency".

Then when that logic was turned on it's head, the argument transformed into "Lebron is better because of TS%"

Did you miss my first post in this thread?


As someone who watched Kobe for his entire prime years, this post is just pure comedy. :oldlol:

The only thing he has a case for is being one of the greatest scorers to ever step on the court, at his peak, he was an animal of a scorer, actually had more range on his shot than MJ, also a better ball-handler, but he never really reached MJ's athletic ability and was a poor shot selector at times.

The knock on Kobe is that besides scoring, he didn't really provide much to other aspects of the game compared to other all-time greats like LeBron. He was actually a top tier defender during the 1st 3 peat, but by '03 up until he retired, his defense was nothing to right home about. He could man you up when he was serious, but he was often out of position and was even criticized by Phil Jackson for his lack of defense by 2004 or so. Him making a bunch of all-defensive teams was strictly a reputation award. It was a running joke among all fans. He wasn't really known for his passing, he was a capable passer for sure, but for the most part he was known as a "do it yourself" player and got some criticism for selfishness.

And what gets swept under the rug about Kobe is his performances in big games. He was flat out bad in game 7's, closeout games, and had some pretty underwhelming Finals, guys like MJ & LeBron blow him out of the water in those categories.

I clearly state his lack of versatility compared to LeBron.

Nice try though.

[elementally morale]

Whether you like it or not, your whole "Kobe is in the GOAT convo" belief is a claim that isn't agreed upon by most fans.

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=2004777


You may have Kobe as low as not even top 100 for all I care, but 'most fans' are nowhere near message boards. Basketball sites altogether have how many people discussing these things? 100,000 thousand world wide? I doubt it's even that much. Not even 0.1% of viewers following the sport on a quasi-regular basis are discussing it on forums like this one. You may say: okay, but we are 'serious' fans. Maybe. But whatever the critics say about a TV show, a movie, a book or an album, it is the general public that decides things in the end. Several hundred people on a given website is a fun community but that's it. If 'the majority of posters on a given site' is an argument and you want to use it, you have to accept x million votes on another website, too. And we know for a fact that most fans do have Kobe in their top 20. (Top 10, and a majority probably even in their top 5). You may try to exclude those votes as coming from 'morons' who do not 'follow the game' but we all can exclude whatever and whoever we want if we so please.

[1987_Lakers]

:roll:

Keep in mind, you're arguing with someone who doesn't know what an advanced stat is.

"plus-minus tracks down how many points a player has scored" - full court
:lol

[Baller234]

Did you miss my first post in this thread?



I clearly state his lack of versatility compared to LeBron.

Nice try tough.

Oh wow he's versatile? Okay.. and? What about scoring versatility? Does that count?

Lebron's overall versatility might be a factor if you're comparing him to someone like Melo, but you're comparing him to Kobe. Kobe was an actual leader who also played great defense.

Lebron is a better passer than Kobe. Kobe is a better one on one player, better scorer, better leader, better free throw shooter... and far more dangerous with the ball in his hands at the end of a game.

Give me MAMBA.

[Axe]

Oh wow he's versatile? Okay.. and? What about scoring versatility? Does that count?

Lebron's overall versatility might be a factor if you're comparing him to someone like Melo, but you're comparing him to Kobe. Kobe was an actual leader who also played great defense.

Lebron is a better passer than Kobe. Kobe is a better one on one player, better scorer, better leader, better free throw shooter... and far more dangerous with the ball in his hands at the end of a game.

Give me MAMBA.
If kobe was all that you say, then why did he end up his career only having one league mvp and two finals mvps? Just curious to know.

[Baller234]

If kobe was all that you say, then why did he end up his career only having one league mvp and two finals mvps? Just curious to know.

Look at this dogshit.

First it was made up advanced statistics. Now it's fake narrative driven media awards.

You Bronnies have ZERO shame. Next you're gonna ask how come Kobe doesn't have an in-season tournament trophy.

:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

[RRR3]

LeBron obliterates Kobe in impact stats, he's quite literally factually better. They played their careers during a time when such things could be tracked, this isn't like comparing Elgin Baylor to John Havlicek, we actually have the data. Arguing against stats is stupid, literally every competent GM uses advanced stats and impact data to determine who they get. The reason guys like Billy Beane in the MLB and Darryl Morey in the NBA were able to get ahead of the rest of the field was because they were using advanced stats when the rest of the league was still using silly stuff like "killer instinct" or whatever buzzwords talking heads come up with. If anyone is curious what these stats are, EPM, LEBRON, RAPM, RPM, APM, PIPM. Pretty much all these stats rank MJ and LBJ as the two best ever since such data was tracked (mid 90s), which shouldn't be surprising to anyone.

[1987_Lakers]

Oh wow he's versatile? Okay.. and? What about scoring versatility? Does that count?

Lebron's overall versatility might be a factor if you're comparing him to someone like Melo, but you're comparing him to Kobe. Kobe was an actual leader who also played great defense.

Lebron is a better passer than Kobe. Kobe is a better one on one player, better scorer, better leader, better free throw shooter... and far more dangerous with the ball in his hands at the end of a game.

Give me MAMBA.

KD is better one on one player, better scorer & free throw shooter than LeBron, yet nobody has him ranked ahead of him.

Better leader? We are talking about a guy who didn't speak to teammates because he felt superior (Ask Smush Parker)

[Axe]

Look at this dogshit.

First it was made up advanced statistics. Now it's fake narrative driven media awards.

You Bronnies have ZERO shame. Next you're gonna ask how come Kobe doesn't have an in-season tournament trophy.

:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:
Just answer the freaking question, you dolt. :confusedshrug:

Idc if you think he's the better player between the two. That question is related with regards to his actual all-time ranking.

[Baller234]

LeBron obliterates Kobe in impact stats, he's quite literally factually better. They played their careers during a time when such things could be tracked, this isn't like comparing Elgin Baylor to John Havlicek, we actually have the data. Arguing against stats is stupid, literally every competent GM uses advanced stats and impact data to determine who they get. The reason guys like Billy Beane in the MLB and Darryl Morey in the NBA were able to get ahead of the rest of the field was because they were using advanced stats when the rest of the league was still using silly stuff like "killer instinct" or whatever buzzwords talking heads come up with.

:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

The stat dork era ladies and gentlemen.

Sorry but you can't judge greatness using a calculator.

Bronnies down BAD in this thread. Just exposing themselves as casual fans.

[Baller234]

Just answer the freaking question, you dolt. :confusedshrug:

Idc if you think he's the better player between the two. That question is related with regards to his actual all-time ranking.

I think if you're using regular season MVP as a criteria to judge players you're a effing retard.

Happy?

[elementally morale]

LeBron obliterates Kobe in impact stats, he's quite literally factually better. They played their careers during a time when such things could be tracked, this isn't like comparing Elgin Baylor to John Havlicek, we actually have the data. Arguing against stats is stupid, literally every competent GM uses advanced stats and impact data to determine who they get. The reason guys like Billy Beane in the MLB and Darryl Morey in the NBA were able to get ahead of the rest of the field was because they were using advanced stats when the rest of the league was still using silly stuff like "killer instinct" or whatever buzzwords talking heads come up with.

And many GMs make sub-optimal decisions many times. I'm not getting into this Kobe vs. LeBron debate but basing literally everything on stats in basketball is not the way to go. The players themselves actually don't. They don't want teammates with the best advanced stats, they want teammates who can ball and who they can go to battle with.

[RRR3]

:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

The stat dork era ladies and gentlemen.

Sorry but you can't judge greatness using a calculator.

Bronnies down BAD in this thread. Just exposing themselves as casual fans.
You are the type of moron to argue Derek Jeter was better than Alex Rodriguez. I hate to break it to you, but all the best teams are run by "stat guys". Anyone who analyzes sports seriously relies heavily on stats. It's why Billy Beane was able to build a dominant roster with a pauper (relatively speaking) budget back when no one else was thinking outside the box.

[Baller234]

KD is better one on one player, better scorer & free throw shooter than LeBron, yet nobody has him ranked ahead of him.

Better leader? We are talking about a guy who didn't speak to teammates because he felt superior (Ask Smush Parker)

KD never had the heart. He's been soft his entire career. He's had his moments but for the most part he never knew when or how to take over. He only dominated when had the luxury of playing on a super team with multiple super weapons at his disposal. He was never as good as Bron or as dominant.

Watch the Redeem Team doc and then tell me who's the better leader between Kobe and Lebron. You tell me who was better at setting the tone and setting the example for their teammates.

Guy said SMUSH PARKER. :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

[RRR3]

And many GMs make sub-optimal decisions many times. I'm not getting into this Kobe vs. LeBron debate but basing literally everything on stats in basketball is not the way to go. The players themselves actually don't. They don't want teammates with the best advanced stats, they want teammates who can ball and who they can go to battle with.
The GMs who make bad decisions are the ones who don't rely heavily on data. Guys like Masai Ujiri, Pat Riley, Darryl Morey, Brad Stevens etc. rely heavily on an analytics department. Your other point would only make sense if people would rather play with Kobe than LeBron, but most people would prefer not to play with guys like MJ or Kobe because they're just impossible to deal with. LeBron can be corny and melodramatic, but you know he's not gonna literally assault you or not talk to you.

[RRR3]

KD never had the heart. He's been soft his entire career. He's had his moments but for the most part he never knew when or how to take over. He only dominated when had the luxury of playing on a super team with multiple super weapons at his disposal. He was never as good as Bron or as dominant.

Watch the Redeem Team doc and then tell me who's the better leader between Kobe and Lebron. You tell me who was better at setting the tone and setting the example for their teammates.

Guy said SMUSH PARKER. :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:
For someone who claims to be an independent thinker, it's funny how you're just regurgitating talking head nonsense in this thread while me and 1987 are using actual arguments.

[Baller234]

You are the type of moron to argue Derek Jeter was better than Alex Rodriguez. I hate to break it to you, but all the best teams are run by "stat guys". Anyone who analyzes sports seriously relies heavily on stats. It's why Billy Beane was able to build a dominant roster with a pauper (relatively speaking) budget back when no one else was thinking outside the box.

That's funny because aside from one season the lasting image of A-Rod in the playoffs was usually him striking out.

If Jeter and A-Rod had switched roles, I'm almost positive that A-Rod wouldn't have had the same number of rings. Jeter was the spiritual leader and tone setter for the entire team. He actually came up big when it mattered.

You know nothing about sports. You're a stat dork. Log off.

[1987_Lakers]

Guy said SMUSH PARKER. :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

He was a teammate, no matter how bad a player is, as a teammate if I saw our best player shit and not talk to another player for "not being on his level", I would look at him different. At the end of the day, you guys are there for the same purpose, to battle together as a team and win. That right there isn't good for team morale.

Kobe was a good leader in the sense that he didn't let anyone slack off, but he was pretty distant from his teammates and was a known a-hole. This is the same guy who didn't invite any of his teammates to his wedding and cried wolf when none of his teammates backed him up when he went through the whole rape allegations stuff.

[RRR3]

This dude legit just said Derek Jeter was better than A-Rod :roll:


You can't argue with that kinda stupidity. Jesus Christ. Never talk baseball again.


That is legit the stupidest shit I've read all day lmfao.







DEREK JETER over A-Rod :roll:







That's like ranking Donovan Mitchell over Wilt :yaohappy:

[Axe]

I think if you're using regular season MVP as a criteria to judge players you're a effing retard.

Happy?
So you still can't answer my question eh? What a doofus. :facepalm

And i never implied that it's the only thing that should be looked upon in terms of ranking them. Obviously there are a lot more and you need to know what they have if you're to compare them because that's one way you can differentiate these players in terms of where they would rank.

[RRR3]

Bawler is the type of retard to say something like David Ortiz>Barry Bonds :roll:

ESPN NARRATIVES!!! CLUTCH JEAN!!!! DA WILL TO WIN!!!! MAMBA MENTALITY!

[Baller234]

He was a teammate, no matter how bad a player is, as a teammate if I saw our best player shit and not talk to another player for "not being on his level", I would look at him different. At the end of the day, you guys are there for the same purpose, to battle together and win. That right there isn't good for team morale.

Kobe was a good leader in the sense that he didn't let anyone slack off, but he was pretty distant from his teammates and was a known a-hole. This is the same guy who didn't invite any of his teammates to his wedding and cried wolf when none of his teammates backed him when he went through the whole rape allegations stuff.

Kobe was a better leader because he led by example. He was the hardest worker on the floor at all times. Slacking off wasn't an option. Everyone knew their role.

Look at the way Lamar Odom talked about Kobe after he died. He talks about the guy as if he wasn't human. The way he admired and looked up to Kobe speaks volumes about his ability and his leadership.

Kobe won titles playing with Lamar Odom, Ron Artest, Andrew Bynum, etc.. notorious head cases. They all fell in line under Kobe.

Larry Bird said if you wanna have fun you play with Lebron, if you wanna win you play with Kobe.

[RRR3]

Kobe was a better leader because he led by example. He was the hardest worker on the floor at all times. Slacking off wasn't an option. Everyone knew their role.

Look at the way Lamar Odom talked about Kobe after he died. He talks about the guy as if he wasn't human. The way he admired and looked up to Kobe speaks volumes about his ability and his leadership.

Kobe won titles playing with Lamar Odom, Ron Artest, Andrew Bynum, etc.. notorious head cases. They all fell in line under Kobe.

Larry Bird said if you wanna have fun you play with Lebron, if you wanna win you play with Kobe.
He said this before LeBron had won any rings. Now LeBron has won 4 rings as the best player to Kobe's 2 :yaohappy:

[Baller234]

For someone who claims to be an independent thinker, it's funny how you're just regurgitating talking head nonsense in this thread while me and 1987 are using actual arguments.

Lmao I already dismantled all of those arguments.

Effiency = bogus argument

TS% = bogus argument

[1987_Lakers]

Lmao I already dismantled all of those arguments.

Effiency = bogus argument

TS% = bogus argument

Alot of your arguments are just feelings to be honest. Even your Kobe is more clutch claim is false when the data shows LeBron is the more clutch performer.

[Baller234]

Alot of your arguments are just feelings to be honest. Even your Kobe is more clutch claim is false when the data shows LeBron is the more clutch performer.

Uh oh... the stat dorks have more "data". Better watch out.

Funny how this "data" ceases to be relevant the moment it doesn't benefit your argument.

[RRR3]

Lmao I already dismantled all of those arguments.

Effiency = bogus argument

TS% = bogus argument
No one used TS% as the sole reason LeBron is better, you are creating a straw man like you always do because you’re too dim to understand the argument. LeBron better is because he’s more impactful, this is verifiable with impact data. He’s also won twice as much as the best player on his team so even the winning argument doesn’t work.

[RRR3]

Uh oh... the stat dorks have more "data". Better watch out.

Funny how this "data" ceases to be relevant the moment it doesn't benefit your argument.
There legitimately isn’t any data that says Kobe is better at basketball than LeBron. What are you even talking about?

[rmt]

oh boy, you Kobe and Lebron fans

[1987_Lakers]

Uh oh... the stat dorks have more "data". Better watch out.

Funny how this "data" ceases to be relevant the moment it doesn't benefit your argument.

"Killer instinct"
"Better one on one"
"More clutch"

Literal arguments a teenager would make.

[RRR3]

"Killer instinct"
"Better one on one"
"More clutch"

Literal arguments a teenager would make.
He really needs to watch Moneyball. The “stat guys” won a very long time ago. In every sport.

[elementally morale]

The GMs who make bad decisions are the ones who don't rely heavily on data. Guys like Masai Ujiri, Pat Riley, Darryl Morey, Brad Stevens etc. rely heavily on an analytics department. Your other point would only make sense if people would rather play with Kobe than LeBron, but most people would prefer not to play with guys like MJ or Kobe because they're just impossible to deal with. LeBron can be corny and melodramatic, but you know he's not gonna literally assault you or not talk to you.

In reality, most people were absolutely okay to play with all these guys. You will find a player or two who says bad things about either of them after having played together but that's it. People were okay to play with Jordan. With Kobe. And are okay to play with LeBron.

As for the relying on analytics part, it sure has value. I see many things on the court each game though that are not going into any stat. And if I can see that on TV, there is a lot more to it with your teammate on and off the floor.

[Baller234]

There legitimately isn’t any data that says Kobe is better at basketball than LeBron. What are you even talking about?

Hmm, maybe I will invent a statistic like you guys.

Kobe - 5 championships in 20 seasons
Lebron - 4 championships in 21 seasons

I will call this stat "True Rings Percentage"

And I even did you a favor by including the 2020 Disney invitiational, which everyone knows isn't a real championship. :oldlol:

Mind you Kobe only played with two HOFers and not at the same time. Lebron played with SEVERAL different HOFers at the same time.

I don't know 3tard, looks like the data favors Mamba.

[Baller234]

"Killer instinct"
"Better one on one"
"More clutch"

Literal arguments a teenager would make.

Funny considering that some of the game's greatest players, analysts and coaches have made the exact same arguments.

Bronnies are down BAD.

[1987_Lakers]

Hmm, maybe I will invent a statistic like you guys.

Kobe - 5 championships in 20 seasons
Lebron - 4 championships in 21 seasons

I will call this stat "True Rings Percentage"

And I even did you a favor by including the 2020 Disney invitiational, which everyone knows isn't a real championship. :oldlol:

Mind you Kobe only played with two HOFers and not at the same time. Lebron played with SEVERAL different HOFers at the same time.

I don't know 3tard, looks like the data favors Mamba.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5PDgv5y-S0

Three 2nd fiddle rings.

[RRR3]

In reality, most people were absolutely okay to play with all these guys. You will find a player or two who says bad thing about ether of them after having played together but that's it. People were okay to play with Jordan. With Kobe. And are okay to play with LeBron.

As for the relying on analytics part, it sure has value. I see many things on the court each game though that is not going into any stat. And if I can see that on TV, there is a lot more to it with your teammate on and off the floor.
You do not. For one, they track pretty much everything these days, from screens to distance covered, to hockey assists. For two guys who are highly impactful in terms of stuff that doesn’t show up on the traditional stat sheet (say Marcus Smart) do get their value reflected in analytics because of impact data. Impact data simply measures how well a team plays when the player is in, regardless of if they have a dominant statline or not. Stuff like this is how we know Derek White is a great player for instance.

[RRR3]

Hmm, maybe I will invent a statistic like you guys.

Kobe - 5 championships in 20 seasons
Lebron - 4 championships in 21 seasons

I will call this stat "True Rings Percentage"

And I even did you a favor by including the 2020 Disney invitiational, which everyone knows isn't a real championship. :oldlol:

Mind you Kobe only played with two HOFers and not at the same time. Lebron played with SEVERAL different HOFers at the same time.

I don't know 3tard, looks like the data favors Mamba.
Do you think LeBron couldn’t win 3 rings in 8 years with MJ? Because in order for it to be an equal situation we have to give LeBron someone better than him for 8 years which is what Kobe had.

[Baller234]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5PDgv5y-S0

Three 2nd fiddle rings.

Oh right, Kobe played with Shaq. How could I forget. I guess that means his rings don't count.

Oh that's right.

Dwayne Wade
Chris Bosh
Ray Allen

I'm sorry is this an all star team or was this Lebron's supporting cast!?!?

:oldlol:

[RRR3]

Funny considering that some of the game's greatest players, analysts and coaches have made the exact same arguments.

Bronnies are down BAD.
You realize LeBron is rated higher than Kobe by the majority of people now? The discussion has been MJ and LeBron for a long time now you’re stuck in 2012.

[1987_Lakers]

Oh right, Kobe played with Shaq. How could I forget. I guess that means his rings don't count.

Oh that's right.

Dwayne Wade
Chris Bosh
Ray Allen

I'm sorry is this an all star team or was this Lebron's supporting cast!?!?

:oldlol:

Dude really just mentioned a 37 year old Ray allen. :oldlol:

And Wade was a 20 ppg player with knee issues when LeBron won titles with him. Averaged like 15 ppg during the 2013 run.

Kobe played with a peak Shaq who many feel had a top 5 peak of all time.

[RRR3]

Oh right, Kobe played with Shaq. How could I forget. I guess that means his rings don't count.

Oh that's right.

Dwayne Wade
Chris Bosh
Ray Allen

I'm sorry is this an all star team or was this Lebron's supporting cast!?!?

:oldlol:
Which of those guys were better than LeBron? LeBron never played with anyone who could carry him to a ring. Listing Ray Allen is so funny he averaged like 10 PPG with bad defense when he played with LeBron :lol

[Baller234]

You realize LeBron is rated higher than Kobe by the majority of people now? The discussion has been MJ and LeBron for a long time now you’re stuck in 2012.

If you really wanna play that game then why do you think Bron is better than MJ? Last time I checked he routinely wins the polls whenever he's compared to Lebron.

You really are a walking contradiction.

:oldlol:

[SouBeachTalents]

https://scontent-lga3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.18169-9/13654277_1078087672278788_4578678298561982474_n.jp g?_nc_cat=107&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=c2f564&_nc_ohc=cS7TWWBlHyEAX-0GKbg&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-2.xx&oh=00_AfBKCKg5LXdDuY8mdZLJDIDLugClT1foY8BPViAnuKOx SA&oe=65C199A4

[RRR3]

If you really wanna play that game then why do you think Bron is better than MJ? Last time I checked he routinely wins the polls whenever he's compared to Lebron.

You really are a walking contradiction.

:oldlol:
I don’t think LeBron is better than MJ. You thought you had me. Oops.

[Axe]

https://scontent-lga3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.18169-9/13654277_1078087672278788_4578678298561982474_n.jp g?_nc_cat=107&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=c2f564&_nc_ohc=cS7TWWBlHyEAX-0GKbg&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-2.xx&oh=00_AfBKCKg5LXdDuY8mdZLJDIDLugClT1foY8BPViAnuKOx SA&oe=65C199A4
But stats tho...

:confusedshrug:

[RRR3]

https://scontent-lga3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.18169-9/13654277_1078087672278788_4578678298561982474_n.jp g?_nc_cat=107&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=c2f564&_nc_ohc=cS7TWWBlHyEAX-0GKbg&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-2.xx&oh=00_AfBKCKg5LXdDuY8mdZLJDIDLugClT1foY8BPViAnuKOx SA&oe=65C199A4
Ah but you see LeBron turned them into scrubs. But they were still elite at the same time they were scrubs.

[elementally morale]

You do not. For one, they track pretty much everything these days, from screens to distance covered, to hockey assists. For two guys who are highly impactful in terms of stuff that doesn’t show up on the traditional stat sheet (say Marcus Smart) do get their value reflected in analytics because of impact data. Impact data simply measures how well a team plays when the player is in, regardless of if they have a dominant statline or not. Stuff like this is how we know Derek White is a great player for instance.

Every stat you have out there is impacted by all the other players on the court. Bradley Beal is a cool example, as is Porzingis. It's very hard to measure beforehand how your pieces will fit together in reality. If it was merely a stats game, we would not need games at all. A few computers crunch the numbers and we have a champion before the season starts -- advanced stats tell us exactly what to expect. But it is not like that, and injuries are not the only reason for that.

Anyway, it has very little to do with not including Kobe in a top 20. If you don't you won't and that's okay. But coming with advanced stat upon advanced stat is not something that will convince many people (the ones that will agree didn't like the guy to begin with). It's much easier to say: I just don't want a guy like that on my team, so he is not top 20 for me. That's a totally valid argument, as these lists are not definitive.

[Baller234]

I don’t think LeBron is better than MJ. You thought you had me. Oops.

So then why do you think Lebron is better than Kobe? Kobe is not very far off from Mike.

What specific reason do you have MJ above Lebron? Stats?????

[RRR3]

Every stat you have out there is impacted by all the other players on the court. Bradley Beal is a cool example, as is Porzingis. It's very hard to measure beforehand how your pieces will fit together in reality. If it was merely a stats game, we would not need games at all. A few computers crunch the numbers and we have a champion before the season starts -- advanced stats tell us exactly what to expect. But it is not like that, and injuries are not the only reason for that.

Anyway, it has very little to do with not including Kobe in a top 20. If you don't you won't and that's okay. But coming with advanced stat upon advanced stat is not something that will convince many people (the ones that will agree didn't like the guy to begin with). It's much easier to say: I just don't want a guy like that on my team, so he is not top 20 for me. That's a totally valid argument, as these lists are not definitive.
Yes +/- is impacted by everyone who is on the court that’s why they don’t just use raw +/- and they look at a players contributions in all the various lineups they play in. I never said Kobe wasn’t top 20 either that was the dumbass OP who if you back far enough you can see me arguing against.

[RRR3]

So then why do you think Lebron is better than Kobe? Kobe is not very far off from Mike.

What specific reason do you have MJ above Lebron? Stats?????
Insane comment. Wow. Just wow.

[elementally morale]

You realize LeBron is rated higher than Kobe by the majority of people now? The discussion has been MJ and LeBron for a long time now you’re stuck in 2012.

I we accept this to be true (and why not, let's do it) then we assume it to be important what the majority thinks. If it is, we should also accept their opinion on Kobe. He is most definitely top 10 if voted by the majority all over the world (same in the US). I'd say he is mire likely to be top 5 than top 10. But outside the top 20-25? By the majority? That ain't happening.

However, why is it so damn important what the majority thinks? They are wrong on many things, aren't they? Will they change my opinion when it comes to acknowledging talent in the NBA? Not really.

[RRR3]

I we accept this to be true (and why not, let's do it) then we assume it to be important what the majority thinks. If it is, we should also accept their opinion on Kobe. He is most definitely top 10 if voted by the majority all over the world (same in the US). I'd say he is mire likely to be top 5 than top 10. But outside the top 20-25? By the majority? That ain't happening.

However, why is it so damn important what the majority thinks? They are wrong on many things, aren't they? Will they change my opinion when it comes to acknowledging talent in the NBA? Not really.
Why do you keep accusing me of ranking Kobe outside the top 20-25? Is my username arbitrarywater. Pretty much everyone disagreed with him about that including me. I don’t care what the majority think but he was the one using that fallacious logic to begin with.

[elementally morale]

Yes +/- is impacted by everyone who is on the court that’s why they don’t just use raw +/- and they look at a players contributions in all the various lineups they play in. I never said Kobe wasn’t top 20 either that was the dumbass OP who if you back far enough you can see me arguing against.

I used it as a generalization. (If you don't = If some of you don't = if one doesn't.)
Sorry if that wasn't clear.

[Baller234]

I we accept this to be true (and why not, let's do it) then we assume it to be important what the majority thinks. If it is, we should also accept their opinion on Kobe. He is most definitely top 10 if voted by the majority all over the world (same in the US). I'd say he is mire likely to be top 5 than top 10. But outside the top 20-25? By the majority? That ain't happening.

However, why is it so damn important what the majority thinks? They are wrong on many things, aren't they? Will they change my opinion when it comes to acknowledging talent in the NBA? Not really.

3tard very much needs his opinions to be in line with the popular majority. He needs constant affirmation. That is why he so frequently cites majority opinion whenever he thinks he's winning an argument.

Unless of course his opinion is unpopular and stupid, at which point he will claim he doesn't care about popular opinion.

[RRR3]

3tard very much needs his opinions to be in line with the popular majority. He needs constant affirmation. That is why he so frequently cites majority opinion whenever he thinks he's winning an argument.

Unless of course his opinion is unpopular and stupid, at which point he will claim he doesn't care about popular opinion.
Are you truly so stupid you don’t realize YOU cited other people’s opinions as evidence Kobe was better? I was arguing simply with impact data before that.

Are you senile? Not being able to remember what you said a few posts ago is scary.

[elementally morale]

Why do you keep accusing me of ranking Kobe outside the top 20-25? Is my username arbitrarywater. Pretty much everyone disagreed with him about that including me.

I didn't even disagree. I'm not sure he agrees with himself, I think it's more of a roleplay here on his part. Dude likes controversy. I have no problem with his thread though as I stated on earlier pages. I just don't necessarily believe he believes in what he says. He believes it is something that will generate many answers and he is right. I don't think he hates Kobe, he is way too young to be emotionally involved. But even if he does, it's okay. If he doesn't but genuinely thinks he is not top 20, so be it. Won't change anything.

[Baller234]

Are you truly so stupid you don’t realize YOU cited other people’s opinions as evidence Kobe was better? I was arguing simply with impact data before that.

Are you senile? Not being able to remember what you said a few posts ago is scary.

I did that only to counter YOUR side's argument you silly bastard. :oldlol:

You guys were the ones who swore Lebron was better because he "appeared higher on more lists".

[RRR3]

I didn't even disagree. I'm not sure he agrees with himself, I think it's more of a roleplay here on his part. Dude likes controversy. I have no problem with his thread though as I stated on earlier pages. I just don't necessarily believe he believes in what he says. He believes it is something that will generate many answers and he is right. I don't think he hates Kobe, he is way too young to be emotionally involved. But even if he does, it's okay. If he doesn't but genuinely thinks he is not top 20, so be it. Won't change anything.
I don’t think you can argue Kobe is outside of the top 20 in total career value added. Outside of the top 20 in terms of peaks is certainly arguable but if he was ranking just by peak he wouldn’t be so certain LeBron is GOAT. He can’t pick and choose when longevity matters as an argument. Kobe was a highly positive player for like 16 years (majority of those years an MVP level player) that’s a ton of career value added regardless of if his peak is too 20 or not.

[RRR3]

I did that only to counter YOUR side's argument you silly bastard. :oldlol:

You guys were the ones who swore Lebron was better because he "appeared higher on more lists".
That was 1987 not me and that was only one aspect of his argument although I’d concede it’s not a very good argument objectively speaking. Considering Kobe’s case over LeBron relies heavily on arguments like that though I fully understand why he used it.

[elementally morale]

I don’t think you can argue Kobe is outside of the top 20 in total career value added. Outside of the top 20 in terms of peaks is certainly arguable but if he was ranking just by peak he wouldn’t be so certain LeBron is GOAT. He can’t pick and choose when longevity matters as an argument. Kobe was a highly positive player for like 16 years (majority of those years an MVP level player) that’s a ton of career value added regardless of if his peak is too 20 or not.

He can argue whatever he wants. :-) Not many people will agree with him. There is a very slim chance he is Einstein, with whom at one time most of the scientific world disagreed on relativity. Most of the time you are not Einstein if you have a really controversial take. The younger you are the more you tend to believe you are the exception though.

The original question was 'how we go about' tanking Kobe. Well, I can only speak for myself. I saw all his career as I've seen plenty of basketball outside Kobe as well. I 'feel' he is comfortably top 15. And then it gets really tough. Greatness is not just 'being good at basketball and winning'. Greatness is in many ways 'how much you were touched'. I wasn't touched by Shaq. I was touched by Hakeem. Just these two examples. Which of these two were better or greater? I'd go with Hakeem, the general consensus (majority) would side with Shaq. And there were many many great players who also have the resume. It is very hard to really argue one player is top 10 and the other is only at #14.

[Phoenix]

Kobe outside the Shaq years from 2004-2013 won 2 rings, 2 finals MVPs, 1 MVP, 8 all-NBA first teams. He also got 6 all-D first teams but alot of those were reputation-based so assign whatever value you wish to that. The bolded achievements, however, fairly make for a top 15 career IMO.

How much higher he goes than that depends on how much value you assign to him being a #2(2000) or 1B( 2001, 2002) to Shaq for his first 3 rings.96-99 and 11-13 before prime and end of prime didn't create any positive or negative legacy bullet points.

Also, I read a comment above about Kawhi being over him? Kawhi's pretty impossible to rank because so much of his career has been marred by injuries. Now, 2019 Kawhi vs Kobe's peak is an interesting argument, but from a career ranking POV? No chance in hell.

[Carbine]

Kobe is top 12 all time without a doubt.

You might not think his peak was top ten, you might not think his longevity is top ten, or his overall resume but combined together there are not 12 other players that have been better.

Signature players of their era

Russell/Wilt
Kareem
Magic/Bird
MJ/Hakeem
Shaq/Kobe/Duncan
Lebron/Steph

That's your top 12 right there. Kobe has to be included.

Jokic/Giannis will be on there next when their careers are winding down as the defining players of their era. We can have a discussion about Kobe being outside the top 12 at that point but not any sooner.

[elementally morale]

Kobe is top 12 all time without a doubt.

You might not think his peak was top ten, you might not think his longevity is top ten, or his overall resume but combined together there are not 12 other players that have been better.

Signature players of their era

Russell/Wilt
Kareem
Magic/Bird
MJ/Hakeem
Shaq/Kobe/Duncan
Lebron/Steph

That's your top 12 right there. Kobe has to be included.

Jokic/Giannis will be on there next when their careers are winding down as the defining players of their era. We can have a discussion about Kobe being outside the top 12 at that point but not any sooner.


I had something like this in mind when I said I 'feel' he is comfortably top 15. And I did add LeBron, Steph and Jokic. LeBron is obviously top 10, even if you dislike his game (I do). Steph and Jokic 'feel' top 15 to me. Jokic may need 2-3 years to prove this but I'd put money on him if I were a betting man. Giannis is again someone whose game I don't like. Not top 15 for me as of now but I admit I'm biased.

At any rate, it is fairly easy to fall out of the top 10. Not enough spots for all the great players I've seen. Even if I exclude players whose primes were before 1983-84 (which I do as I don't like rating players before my time and I was 10 at the time) and there is no Russell/Wilt/Kareem/Oscar/etc., there are still too many top 10 worthy players for it not to be a knock on someone to fall just short.

[Wally450]

I've got him in the 10-14 range. I believe if I were to make my list, he's drop at 12.

[ArbitraryWater]

Kobe outside the Shaq years from 2004-2013 won 2 rings, 2 finals MVPs, 1 MVP, 8 all-NBA first teams. He also got 6 all-D first teams but alot of those were reputation-based so assign whatever value you wish to that. The bolded achievements, however, fairly make for a top 15 career IMO.

How much higher he goes than that depends on how much value you assign to him being a #2(2000) or 1B( 2001, 2002) to Shaq for his first 3 rings.96-99 and 11-13 before prime and end of prime didn't create any positive or negative legacy bullet points.

Also, I read a comment above about Kawhi being over him? Kawhi's pretty impossible to rank because so much of his career has been marred by injuries. Now, 2019 Kawhi vs Kobe's peak is an interesting argument, but from a career ranking POV? No chance in hell.


I care much less about these achievements and categorized 1A/1B surface-level descriptions than others it seems.

They do very little in telling us how good a player actually played.

Theres still a million circumstances that go into that, so it makes little sense to compare from that basis.

[John8204]

Signature players of their era

Russell/Wilt
Kareem
Magic/Bird
MJ/Hakeem
Shaq/Kobe/Duncan
Lebron/Steph
.

That's similar to how I see it but I wouldn't discount the first generation....and I would have them in a different order.

Mikan/Pettit/Baylor
Wilt/Russell/Oscar
Kareem/West/Havlicek
Bird/Magic/Moses
Jordan/Hakeem/Stockton
Kobe/Duncan/Dirk/Shaq
Lebron/Steph

[Phoenix]

I care much less about these achievements and categorized 1A/1B surface-level descriptions than others it seems.

They do very little in telling us how good a player actually played.

Theres still a million circumstances that go into that, so it makes little sense to compare from that basis.

It's your thread. Feel free to drop a rankings list removing all the criteria you don't care about and focus on 'how good someone is', however you subjectively define that.

I don't particularly care a great deal about 'rankings' in general and prefer a tiered list approach. Circumstances of how a players career pans out and people valuing different criteria amounts to pissing up a tree.

[elementally morale]

It's your thread. Feel free to drop a rankings list removing all the criteria you don't care about and focus on 'how good someone is', however you subjectively define that.

I don't particularly care a great deal about 'rankings' in general and prefer a tiered list approach, specifically because of the circumstantial nature of how a players career pans out.

He will come back with stats. I mean: he MUST come back with stats. He is to young to have seen enough all time greats. And even if you did see Dirk's championship run at age 12, being 12 is too young for this on one hand and it means you missed most of Dirk's career when it happened almost entirely. Same with Nash, Kidd, Garnett, etc. And if you go back and watch games 'before your time', neither it is the same as it would've been in real time, nor it is 'all the games' or a reasonably large sample. There simply isn't enough time to do that. Plus most of those games are not easily available anyway.

What could I do if I had the task to rank players of the 60s and 70s? Stats... some footage... articles at the time... that's basically it. I woudln't stand a chance in a debate with someone who is e.g. 69 years old.

[outofstomach]

Wait I'm confused.

Before it was "Lebron is better because of efficiency".

Then when that logic was turned on it's head, the argument transformed into "Lebron is better because of TS%"

And now that THAT logic got turned on it's head, the argument has transformed yet again. Now it's "Lebron is better because I've seen him ranked higher on other people's lists..."

https://media0.giphy.com/media/J2DYCDA15pTau86IGr/giphy.gif?cid=6c09b9520jazqxtz6a9ob7n3m4erjib6vgf3 7y93hdw11a64&ep=v1_gifs_search&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g

:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

If you really wanna break down skill for skill, Kobe is a far better one on one player and he's also better at playing off the ball. So miss me with all that fake advanced bullshit.

I respect Lebron as one of the all time great players, but his fans are the absolute worst and really don't know about dikk about dikk. It's really just stats stats stats with you guys.

It's close but give me Mamba all day.
had to log in to say that this is pretty ridiculous that this is exactly what happened :lol

not even a Kobe fan or anything like that but the dude really moved the goalposts shamelessly 3 times, and then of course resident Kobe hater RRR3 is over here cheering him on

shameless

[Phoenix]

He will come back with stats. I mean: he MUST come back with stats. He is to young to have seen enough all time greats. And even if you did see Dirk's championship run at age 12, being 12 is too young for this on one hand and it means you missed most of Dirk's career when it happened almost entirely. Same with Nash, Kidd, Garnett, etc. And if you go back and watch games 'before your time', neither it is the same as it would've been in real time, nor it is 'all the games' or a reasonably large sample. There simply isn't enough time to do that. Plus most of those games are not easily available anyway.

What could I do if I had the task to rank players of the 60s and 70s? Stats... some footage... articles at the time... that's basically it. I woudln't stand a chance in a debate with someone who is e.g. 69 years old.

The NBA is old enough that you just have to weigh what guys did in their era, or maybe do something like rank based on relative dominance against their contemporaries ( which is of course as subjective as all other criteria). Being north of 75 years, you could probably split the league into 4 eras at least based on rules alone. As I said above I prefer tier lists, because as time passes trying to rank players ends up being a game of musical chairs. Imagine trying to rank a player who was around in year 10 of the league with someone in year 90 when the time comes.

[elementally morale]

The NBA is old enough that you just have to weigh what guys did in their era, or maybe do something like rank based on relative dominance against their contemporaries ( which is of course as subjective as all other criteria). Being north of 75 years, you could probably split the league into 4 eras at least based on rules alone. As I said above I prefer tier lists, because as time passes trying to rank players ends up being a game of musical chairs. Imagine trying to rank a player who was around in year 10 of the league with someone in year 90 when the time comes.

Sure. I do it the tier-way myself. But with someone like Wilt, I cannot even do the tier thing. He was very good. Can I compare him with/to Tim Duncan? Absolutely not.

[rmt]

He will come back with stats. I mean: he MUST come back with stats. He is to young to have seen enough all time greats. And even if you did see Dirk's championship run at age 12, being 12 is too young for this on one hand and it means you missed most of Dirk's career when it happened almost entirely. Same with Nash, Kidd, Garnett, etc. And if you go back and watch games 'before your time', neither it is the same as it would've been in real time, nor it is 'all the games' or a reasonably large sample. There simply isn't enough time to do that. Plus most of those games are not easily available anyway.

What could I do if I had the task to rank players of the 60s and 70s? Stats... some footage... articles at the time... that's basically it. I woudln't stand a chance in a debate with someone who is e.g. 69 years old.

I'm 61 and have been watching the NBA since 1977. I personally do not feel that Dirk belongs on that list.

I agree with "neither is it the same as it would've been in real time" especially when I hear the (young) Lebron fans' argument vs MJ. It's just different living through it in real time and I say this as someone who hated MJ (but still undisputed GOAT to me).

[elementally morale]

I'm 61 and have been watching the NBA since 1977. I personally do not feel that Dirk belongs on that list.

I agree with "neither is it the same as it would've been in real time" especially when I hear the (young) Lebron fans' argument vs MJ. It's just different living through it in real time and I say this as someone who hated MJ (but still undisputed GOAT to me).

Dirk doesn't belong in the top 15 for me it was just an example. Kobe does. At least after 1980. He is not at the top of the list, that much I know. (I've been a Laker and Kobe fan for 20 years but I know he is not among the 5 best players I've seen since 1980.) But this is where is ends for me. Top 15, not top 5... and I'll have to leave it at that. But I guess it depends almost entirely on the way you want to look at it. His stats are worse than they could be for at least 4 reasons: strong defensive era, Shaq's presence, him being the end of shotcloc end of quarter shot taker and his own often times suspect decision making). But then again, greatness is a lot more than the ability to play. It is also how many people you toched and how much joy or something like that you brought. So Duncan may or may not have been 'better' than Shaq but he is definitely not greater. (At least this is the way I look at it.)

[rmt]

I'm 61 and have been watching the NBA since 1977. I personally do not feel that Dirk belongs on that list.

I agree with "neither is it the same as it would've been in real time" especially when I hear the (young) Lebron fans' argument vs MJ. It's just different living through it in real time and I say this as someone who hated MJ (but still undisputed GOAT to me).

Sorry elementally morale - I meant John8403's list (with Dirk).

[Phoenix]

Dirk doesn't belong in the top 15 for me it was just an example. Kobe does. At least after 1980. He is not at the top of the list, that much I know. (I've been a Laker and Kobe fan for 20 years but I know he is not among the 5 best players I've seen since 1980.) But this is where is ends for me. Top 15, not top 5... and I'll have to leave it at that. But I guess it depends almost entirely on the way you want to look at it. His stats are worse than they could be for at least 4 reasons: strong defensive era, Shaq's presence, him being the end of shotcloc end of quarter shot taker and his own often times suspect decision making). But then again, greatness is a lot more than the ability to play. It is also how many people you toched and how much joy or something like that you brought. So Duncan may or may not have been 'better' than Shaq but he is definitely not greater. (At least this is the way I look at it.)

Also( and this could be tangentially connected to Shaq's presence) unlike many other guys in your top 10/15 or whatever Kobe wasn't a 20ppg player till year 4( or 3 if you want to round up 19.9 in '99). Though even without Shaq 18 year old Kobe wasn't dropping 20 unless he was the featured player, and he wasn't at that level as a rookie. Alot of your all-timers came into the league ready to produce big numbers ( MJ, Wilt, Lebron, Kareem, Shaq, Bird, Magic, Duncan, Hakeem, etc) so their career stats wouldn't take a hit like Kobe averaging 7 as a rookie and 15 his second year. I can't think of anyone considered a top 20 player who produced like that as a rookie. I guess Garnett and Dirk if you consider them in that category.

[rmt]

Also( and this could be tangentially connected to Shaq's presence) unlike many other guys in your top 10/15 or whatever Kobe wasn't a 20ppg player till year 4( or 3 if you want to round up 19.9 in '99). Though even without Shaq 18 year old Kobe wasn't dropping 20 unless he was the featured player, and he wasn't at that level as a rookie. Alot of your all-timers came into the league ready to produce big numbers ( MJ, Wilt, Lebron, Kareem, Shaq, Bird, Magic, Duncan, Hakeem, etc) so their career stats wouldn't take a hit like Kobe averaging 7 as a rookie and 15 his second year. I can't think of anyone considered a top 20 player who produced like that as a rookie. I guess Garnett and Dirk if you consider them in that category.

20ppg is like nothing these days - I compare to era player is playing in. I remember a playoff game where MJ had like 5-6 threes in a half? (and he hated the three - said it takes away from his game). Imagine if he really practiced it the way players do today)?

[Phoenix]

20ppg is like nothing these days - I compare to era player is playing in. I remember a playoff game where MJ had like 5-6 threes in a half? (and he hated the three - said it takes away from his game). Imagine if he really practiced it the way players do today)?

That's not really where I was going with it. I'm saying Kobe starting out averaging 7ppg impacted his career numbers, compared to other all-timers who were stronger producers out the gate, being more mature and NBA-ready.

[rmt]

That's not really where I was going with it. I'm saying Kobe starting out averaging 7ppg impacted his career numbers, compared to other all-timers who were stronger producers out the game, being more mature and NBA-ready.

I know - my comment regarding ppg was mostly to the current fans obsessed with stats.

[Phoenix]

I know - my comment regarding ppg was mostly to the current fans obsessed with stats.

Cool. But as to your point, yes the bar on 20ppg has been lowered. There's like ( last I looked) about 40 guys doing that this year( same as last year). You got guys doing it now that the average fan probably doesn't even know, and will not sniff an all-star or all-NBA team.

[ArbitraryWater]

rmt is some old woman who doesnt really seem fit for this convo tbh


She doesnt get the finer things of the game at all. Dirk is a testament to that. Hes like an IQ test.

[elementally morale]

That's not really where I was going with it. I'm saying Kobe starting out averaging 7ppg impacted his career numbers, compared to other all-timers who were stronger producers out the game, being more mature and NBA-ready.

I think Kobe is a great example of overdoing. He wanted to become great (which is absolutely fine) but he just 'worked too much'. Less would've been more, I think. He got to a point where he was more than good enough and the emphasis should've been on team play. He wasn't bad in that regard, at least not as bas as some people trying to prove he was. He won most of the time he had a good team. Shaq+Kobe worked (until it didn't but they were both too immature). Shaq+Gasol also worked. Some people say he had very bad Finals performances against the Pistons or when they lost to Boston. Not true. He wasn't as great as he was at other times but that's about it. Still has 5 rings and it could be 7 had he played better. But to say it didn't work is false. 5 rings is not nothing.

However, he wasn't really talented. Most of what he did was dou to hard work. And that was the trap he fell in. He thought: more work on his game, even better results. I wish he worked a bit less. On the other hand, his legacy is his exactly because of his / this grinding. I can absolutely understand why someone who was deeply touched has him in his top 5. And I understand the people who 'weren't there at the time' and don't really get what is/he was all about. It took me some time after his retirement and death to assess his career 'properly'. (Meaning: in a way I can agree with myself.) I arrived at this top 5-15 since 1980 thing. Let's say: top 10ish. If you want to argue #6 or #13, I'm fine either way. (If you have him at #2 or #23 I'm still fine but I won't agree. Between 5-15 I'll agree with anybody, I think.)

[elementally morale]

rmt is some old woman who doesnt really seem fit for this convo tbh


She doesnt get the finer things of the game at all. Dirk is a testament to that. Hes like an IQ test.


Or maybe he is not German. :-)
For a really really long time my all-time favorite tennis player was Becker. He was the one that touched me in my childhood. Was he better than Sampras or Agassi? I don't think so in retrospect.

[1987_Lakers]

I think Kobe is a great example of overdoing. He wanted to become great (which is absolutely fine) but he just 'worked too much'. Less would've been more, I think. He got to a point where he was more than good enough and the emphasis should've been on team play. He wasn't bad in that regard, at least not as bas as some people trying to prove he was. He won most of the time he had a good team. Shaq+Kobe worked (until it didn't but they were both too immature). Shaq+Gasol also worked. Some people say he had very bad Finals performances against the Pistons or when they lost to Boston. Not true. He wasn't as great as he was at other times but that's about it. Still has 5 rings and it could be 7 had he played better. But to say it didn't work is false. 5 rings is not nothing.

However, he wasn't really talented. Most of what he did was dou to hard work. And that was the trap he fell in. He thought: more work on his game, even better results. I wish he worked a bit less. On the other hand, his legacy is his exactly because of his / this grinding. I can absolutely understand why someone who was deeply touched has him in his top 5. And I understand the people who 'weren't there at the time' and don't really get what is/he was all about. It took me some time after his retirement and death to assess his career 'properly'. (Meaning: in a way I can agree with myself.) I arrived at this top 5-15 since 1980 thing. Let's say: top 10ish. If you want to argue #6 or #13, I'm fine either way. (If you have him at #2 or #23 I'm still fine but I won't agree. Between 5-15 I'll agree with anybody, I think.)

I don't know how you can say that. Kobe vs the Pistons was historically bad. 22.6 ppg on 45.6 TS% is horrific no matter how you slice it.

[Phoenix]

Some people say he had very bad Finals performances against the Pistons or when they lost to Boston. Not true. He wasn't as great as he was at other times but that's about it. Still has 5 rings and it could be 7 had he played better. But to say it didn't work is false. 5 rings is not nothing.



He was definitely bad against Detroit, playing hero ball to the tune of 23ppg on 38% effectively shot them out of the series. Granted, I still think Detroit wins even if they fed Shaq more but I doubt it's a gentlemans sweep. Malone being injured didn't help either, of course....

[rmt]

Or maybe he is not German. :-)
For a really really long time my all-time favorite tennis player was Becker. He was the one that touched me in my childhood. Was he better than Sampras or Agassi? I don't think so in retrospect.

I feel the same way about Federer (such a beautiful game). Djokovic's record has way surpassed Fed's (although that weeks at #1 is extended due to covid), but Fed will always be my fav.

[elementally morale]

I don't know how you can say that. Kobe vs the Pistons was historically bad. 22.6 ppg on 45.6 TS% is horrific no matter how you slice it.

I agree it was plenty of bad decision making, but the one game they did win was in large part due to Kobe. At the time it happened it seemed to me the whole team was subpar. Watching the games I didn't have the feeling Shaq would deliver. Those Pistons were good and played out of their minds and the Lakers just didn't have the answers. I do understand if someone saw it differently. Even if you did, that's one year. And it's not like 'he was garbage' all year. He had a bad Finals. (How bad is subject to interpretation.) It happened to others in history. LeBron had a very bad Finals vs. the Mavs. Does that alone define him? ABsolutely not and I don't even like the guy.

[rmt]

rmt is some old woman who doesnt really seem fit for this convo tbh


She doesnt get the finer things of the game at all. Dirk is a testament to that. Hes like an IQ test.

True, I am an old woman :-) But who are you to determine whether I get a say in this conversation or not? I did see the entirety of Dirk's career especially the SW division battles vs Spurs - he was so touched (tears) by the video they did in his retirement game with them.

[Phoenix]

Or maybe he is not German. :-)
For a really really long time my all-time favorite tennis player was Becker. He was the one that touched me in my childhood. Was he better than Sampras or Agassi? I don't think so in retrospect.

Becker was my guy too. First ever tennis match I watched in entirety( or in general IIRC) was Becker-Edberg Wimbledon 89.

[1987_Lakers]

I agree it was plenty of bad decision making, but the one game they did win was in large part due to Kobe. At the time it happened it seemed to me the whole team was subpar. Watching the games I didn't have the feeling Shaq would deliver. Those Pistons were good and played out of their minds and the Lakers just didn't have the answers. I do understand if someone saw it differently. Even if you did, that's one year. And it's not like 'he was garbage' all year. He had a bad Finals. (How bad is subject to interpretation.) It happened to others in history. LeBron had a very bad Finals vs. the Mavs. Does that alone define him? ABsolutely not and I don't even like the guy.

He wasn't garbage all year, but I remember his '04 & '05 seasons being pretty supbar for his standards considering he was pretty much unstoppable in '03. He had to go to court alot during the '04 season with the rape stuff, so I'm sure that affected him.

[elementally morale]

Becker was my guy too. First ever tennis match I watched in entirety( or in general IIRC) was Becker-Edberg Wimbledon 89.

For me it was Becker's first championship year at Wimbledon. 1985, I think. Not sure. Somewhere there.

[rmt]

Losing to or playing poorly against those Pistons was no shame - they were a defensive juggernaut. Duncan doubted the 2005 Finals the most of all his Finals (probably because of all that defensive attention on him).

[rmt]

For me it was Becker's first championship year at Wimbledon. 1985, I think. Not sure. Somewhere there.

A 17 year old - simply amazing!!! Oh, for the good ole serve and volley days.

[elementally morale]

He wasn't garbage all year, but I remember his '04 & '05 seasons being pretty supbar for his standards considering he was pretty much unstoppable in '03. He had to go to court alot during the '04 season with the rape stuff, so I'm sure that affected him.

Again, I agree. But it is something that happens to others. Nash is a very good example. He was a lot better in 2006-8 than the years before. Part of that was his 'own team' and the D'Antoni system but not all of it. He was surprisingly good all of a sudden. Dirk in 2010 and 2011, same thing. And not long before his ring he lost to GS in... well... bad fashion. LeBron is a another player who sort of reinvented himself lately. Yes, 2005 wasn't Kobe's year. Neither was 2004. But it isn't something that should define him. He did overcome all that. If anything, this should be a big plus on everyone's resume. Handling adversity.

[Phoenix]

For me it was Becker's first championship year at Wimbledon. 1985, I think. Not sure. Somewhere there.

Without googling, think it was Becker in 85, Pat Cash 86, Becker 87, Edberg 88. Edit: Edberg came back in 90 to avenge his 89 loss to Becker.

[rmt]

Again, I agree. But it is something that happens to others. Nash is a very good example. He was a lot better in 2006-8 than the years before. Part of that was his 'own team' and the D'Antoni system but not all of it. He was surprisingly good all of a sudden. Dirk in 2010 and 2011, same thing. And not long before his ring he lost to GS in... well... bad fashion. LeBron is a another player who sort of reinvented himself lately. Yes, 2005 wasn't Kobe's year. Neither was 2004. But it isn't something that should define him. He did overcome all that. If anything, this should be a big plus on everyone's resume. Handling adversity.

It's a shame that NBA gave Dirk his MVP award so late (after the loss to GS)- - seeing his look at the trophy so bittersweet - an outstanding year followed by early playoff loss. That GSW crowd was SO LOUD.

[tontoz]

Or maybe he is not German. :-)
For a really really long time my all-time favorite tennis player was Becker. He was the one that touched me in my childhood. Was he better than Sampras or Agassi? I don't think so in retrospect.


Funny story about Becker. Agassi picked up a tell on his serve. Becker used to stick his tongue out when he served, and he would stick it out in the direction he was serving. Agassi noticed this and was able to anticipate his serve for years.

It drove Becker nuts. He even complained to his wife that it was like Agassi was reading his mind. Then one day long after they had retired Agassi finally told him.

[tpols]

It's a shame that NBA gave Dirk his MVP award so late (after the loss to GS)- - seeing his look at the trophy so bittersweet - an outstanding year followed by early playoff loss. That GSW crowd was SO LOUD.


Dirk did beat Duncan H2H with less help at their peaks in the playoffs. Unless you think Josh Howard and Jason Terry are better than Manu and Tony Parker.


https://youtu.be/GgkqL_YhzSQ?si=VS2PzYB_2cbkzS86

The truth is there's not much separating the top players, but Kobes work ethic and psychopathic basketball drive were gonna take him to rings no matter where he went.

I remember somebody said if he got drafted to Charlotte he'd never win. Charlotte was a 50+ win playoff team starting in 1998 in a weak East. So he definitely could've won.

People said he'd never win without Shaq. Then he won twice with him. Then they said he'd never win without the Pau trade but they gave up Marc Gasol for Pau and he ended up being just as good if not better because of his defense.

And if Kobe won with Marc/Odom/Bynum we'd hear the same thing... he was carried by his big men. Kobe would basically have to win 1v5 to get any credit.

[ShawkFactory]

Dirk did beat Duncan H2H with less help at their peaks in the playoffs. Unless you think Josh Howard and Jason Terry are better than Manu and Tony Parker.


https://youtu.be/GgkqL_YhzSQ?si=VS2PzYB_2cbkzS86

The truth is there's not much separating the top players, but Kobes work ethic and psychopathic basketball drive were gonna take him to rings no matter where he went.

I remember somebody said if he got drafted to Charlotte he'd never win. Charlotte was a 50+ win playoff team starting in 1998 in a weak East. So he definitely could've won.

People said he'd never win without Shaq. Then he won twice with him. Then they said he'd never win without the Pau trade but they gave up Marc Gasol for Pau and he ended up being just as good if not better because of his defense.

And if Kobe won with Marc/Odom/Bynum we'd hear the same thing... he was carried by his big men. Kobe would basically have to win 1v5 to get any credit.

Why do you do this? There are times when you genuinely seem interested in discussing the nuances of the game but then you go back to simple arithmetic when it suits.

[tpols]

Why do you do this? There are times when you genuinely seem interested in discussing the nuances of the game but then you go back to simple arithmetic when it suits.

I literally didn't use any arithmetic whatsoever in that whole post. Just words. You've lost the plot yet again mate.

[tpols]

But overall, yeah Kobes polarizing nature gets him more inconsistent hate than most.

Like Kawhi for example... nobody hates on Kawhi because he's quiet. I've always repped Kawhi. But if Kobe won with Marc Gasol / Serge Ibaka / Siakam frontcourt... everybody would say he was carried by his big men. Even if he hung ~ 30/5/5 just like Kawhi did.

Shit Siakam had a better Game 1 than any game of Paus career in the 2019 Finals.


https://youtu.be/3ugrYiEl9gg?si=Rdy6YV0btyFHN55W

And people barely talked about it. If Siakam did that for Kobe we'd never hear the end of it.

Kobe got hate for not beating the stacked Suns as a 7 seed. To get credit he basically would have to win a ring with G-leaguers but even then thered be an excuse.

[ShawkFactory]

I literally didn't use any arithmetic whatsoever in that whole post. Just words. You've lost the plot yet again mate.

:lol

Never change.

[Phoenix]

I remember somebody said if he got drafted to Charlotte he'd never win. Charlotte was a 50+ win playoff team starting in 1998 in a weak East. So he definitely could've won.



That would make an interesting Disney 'What If' season 3. You have to suppose, ignore, and assume quite a few things for that to play out however you're imagining them to.

[elementally morale]

Kobe got hate for not beating the stacked Suns as a 7 seed. To get credit he basically would have to win a ring with G-leaguers but even then thered be an excuse.

Look at it this way. Part of his greatness was him being a polarizing figure. (MJ was the same he was just a bit better and won more.) Kobe is not Kobe if he is universally loved. It works for some guys but it's rare. Most of the time if you are almost universally liked you were not that interesting. A huge chunk of the reason I enjoyed Kobe were his shortcomings and faults. It entertained me. He was absolutely human. Not boring. Some people hate him for the very same things I enjoyed following his journey. He may have tailored his game after MJ and some others (most people do) but as a personality he wasn't the 2nd this and that. He was Kobe. Why would anyone hate Tim Duncan? But why would anyone really love Tim Duncan? Even if we can all agree on him being a great dude and the 'by the book professional'. We do. But... he is just not interesting enough to hate on some 15 years later. So as for Kobe's legacy, him having some haters is not a bad thing. You saw him, you remember him. And by the vast majority of fans he is a top 5 player. At worst top 10. That's a huge accomplishment.

[elementally morale]

Funny story about Becker. Agassi picked up a tell on his serve. Becker used to stick his tongue out when he served, and he would stick it out in the direction he was serving. Agassi noticed this and was able to anticipate his serve for years.

It drove Becker nuts. He even complained to his wife that it was like Agassi was reading his mind. Then one day long after they had retired Agassi finally told him.

I didn't know that.

The matches I loved the most were the ones featuring him and Sampras at the ATP finals indoors. Really epic duels. As for Agassi, he had Becker's number. Most matches I saw went in Andre's favor. It was pretty one-sided after a certain point. I think Agassi played his best tennis against Becker (and Sampras of course but that is a lot more well known.)

Never heard about the tongue thing though. Interestingly, I started to like Agassi in his very late years when he became an underdog. And the speech he gave at his farewell game after defeat (he lost to... well... another Becker) was something I often rewatch.

[Overdrive]

Weve all seen Kobe his whole career or a large portion of it or seen many of his games one way or another... Im now supposed to believe my eyes were deceiving me cause TS% says he was pretty efficient? Sure, he wasnt a net negative by any means, but he was clearly not as efficient as any of the guys I mentioned there.


Didn't you start watching in '11?

Also you're taking these eFG number and say he's inefficient, because he shot 2 to 3 worse than others? That's not even one make or miss a game.

[warriorfan]

rmt is some old woman who doesnt really seem fit for this convo tbh


She doesnt get the finer things of the game at all. Dirk is a testament to that. Hes like an IQ test.

She actually watched Kobe Bryant while you were in some special education class filling out coloring books

I’m sorry she has way more expertise on this subject then some autistic european child who never even watched anything he’s trying to comment about

[warriorfan]

He was definitely bad against Detroit, playing hero ball to the tune of 23ppg on 38% effectively shot them out of the series. Granted, I still think Detroit wins even if they fed Shaq more but I doubt it's a gentlemans sweep. Malone being injured didn't help either, of course....

kobe got shut down by a GOAT defense in legit probability the toughest defensive era. the league had to rewrite the rule book because of them

On the other hand lebron got smoked by the mavericks in a much easier league for offense

[Axe]

But overall, yeah Kobes polarizing nature gets him more inconsistent hate than most.

Like Kawhi for example... nobody hates on Kawhi because he's quiet. I've always repped Kawhi. But if Kobe won with Marc Gasol / Serge Ibaka / Siakam frontcourt... everybody would say he was carried by his big men. Even if he hung ~ 30/5/5 just like Kawhi did.

Shit Siakam had a better Game 1 than any game of Paus career in the 2019 Finals.


https://youtu.be/3ugrYiEl9gg?si=Rdy6YV0btyFHN55W

And people barely talked about it. If Siakam did that for Kobe we'd never hear the end of it.

Kobe got hate for not beating the stacked Suns as a 7 seed. To get credit he basically would have to win a ring with G-leaguers but even then thered be an excuse.
Kobe got hate because people also saw him as cocky and selfish before. Being too confident only showed how arrogant he is, especially to shaq bt. However, he started maturing a bit from that in his early 30s. Had he learned how to be humble since beginning, he might not have gotten viewed or treated that way.

[1987_Lakers]

kobe got shut down by a GOAT defense in legit probability the toughest defensive era.

Richard Jefferson & Michael Redd shot better against that same Pistons team than Kobe did. Obviously you have to give the Pistons defense some credit for their defense, but I remember watching that series as it happened and some of the tough shots Kobe was taking was flat out embarrassing

[warriorfan]

However, why is it so damn important what the majority thinks? They are wrong on many things, aren't they? Will they change my opinion when it comes to acknowledging talent in the NBA? Not really.

100%


Not trying to attack posters here. it if you look at the group that’s crazed about how bad Kobe supposedly was….

Arbitrary Water
1987 Lakers
RRR3

What do all three of these posters have in common? None of them even BEGAN watching basketball during Kobe’s prime. In turn they have cherry picked statistics to try to do some reverse tea leaf reading to try to figure out what actually happened.

All three of these posters don’t really understand the nuances of the game. It’s basically an autistic copy paste from certain picked categories from basketball reference with the analysis of x > y! Checkmate! No context needed as well.

You have weirdos who have been harping on Kobe’s first Finals where he was 21 and Jalen Rose (who has admit this) stepped under kobe’s foot to injur him on purpose.


I’ve never heard any of these guys acknowledge that even one time. Just keep spamming the raw box while claiming he sucks or whatever.


It’s sad they have turned this into something where they can’t even have an intellectually honest conversation about it. (However unfortunately I suspect that some of these guys literally unable too, it’s not trolling, they just are incapable of doing it.

[warriorfan]

Richard Jefferson & Michael Redd shot better against that same Pistons team than Kobe did. Obviously you have to give the Pistons defense some credit for their defense, but I remember watching that series as it happened and some of the tough shots Kobe was taking was flat out embarrassing

You saying Kobe had to take tough shots vs possibly the best Defense of all time?

Oh ****. This is a groundbreaking revelation.

Let’s move him down to the 50-60 range.

[1987_Lakers]

100%


Not trying to attack posters here. it if you look at the group that’s crazed about how bad Kobe supposedly was….

Arbitrary Water
1987 Lakers
RRR3

What do all three of these posters have in common? None of them even BEGAN watching basketball during Kobe’s prime.

I joined this forum in 2007 and yet I didn't watch Kobe's prime?

Makes sense.

[HoopsNY]

Yes, because Kobe wasn't a great passer and didn't have a bunch of hockey assists and passes that led to FTs for his bigs due to the triangle lol. Phil surely didn't say that KB was the best playmaker he had ever coached (better than Pip and MJ), right?

In 2013 under D'antoni, Kobe made the switch to PG mid-season (he was averaging 29.2 ppg on 57.18%TS through 42 games) with injuries & all and averaged 7.5 assists per game for a 36-game stretch until he tore his achilles.

Yea this is a good point. People forget that 2013 season. I believe the Lakers were 17-25 in those first 42 games and then when Kobe started playing more PG and playmaking, finished 25-11.

It's erroneous to think that he couldn't pass or playmake, as evidenced by how he handled the offense in 2000-02 specifically. Do people think it was Fisher carving up the defense and setting up Shaq?

Also, I think it's disingenuous for some to always take aim at Kobe for the 2000 finals while ignoring LeBron's play in 2007, which was one of the worst performances for an ATG in the finals.

Having said that, Kobe is tough to rank for me. Since I consider peak play the most, I have Wade above him. I'm open to changing that, but it is what it is. My lists are always a mess and constantly changing.

Oh, and I do think LeBron is above Kobe, though not by as wide margin as some would have it.

[1987_Lakers]

You saying Kobe had to take tough shots vs possibly the best Defense of all time?

Oh ****. This is a groundbreaking revelation.

Let’s move him down to the 50-60 range.

He played into Detroit's hands, the Pistons were playing Shaq one on one all series long and instead of feeding him the ball, Kobe went selfish mode like he usually did and shot them out of the series. This was at the height of the Shaq-Kobe feud and Kobe wanted to prove to everyone that it was his team while hurting his team in the process.

[warriorfan]

He played into Detroit's hands, the Pistons were playing Shaq one on one all series long and instead of feeding him the ball, Kobe went selfish mode like he usually did and shot them out of the series. This was at the height of the Shaq-Kobe feud and Kobe wanted to prove to everyone that it was his team while hurting his team in the process.

Ok.

So he underperformed in a Finals vs possibly the greatest defense of all time.

Case closed. Maybe we should push him out of the top 75 while we are at it

[elementally morale]

She actually watched Kobe Bryant while you were in some special education class filling out coloring books

Is she really a she? The last female I remember posting here was eons ago.

[1987_Lakers]

Ok.

So he underperformed in a Finals vs possibly the greatest defense of all time.

Case closed. Maybe we should push him out of the top 75 while we are at it

Nobody is sayomg that, you excused his performance because it was a "GOAT defensive team", I simply provided more context.

[fsvr54]

Ok.

So he underperformed in a Finals vs possibly the greatest defense of all time.

Case closed. Maybe we should push him out of the top 75 while we are at it

This is a good point actually. In 2004 and 2008 Kobe faced the two greatest defensive teams of all time. That level of all-time D has to be accounted for.

[HoopsNY]

With Kobes size, athleticism and skill why didn't he have at least one season with a TS of 60%? :confusedshrug:

That isn't exactly a high bar and he never even got close.

Not sure many were in that era. Don't think Kobe, AI, T-Mac, Vince, Houston, Finley, Pierce, or even Redd had a 60% TS% season from 2000-10. The only one who was really doing it was Ray Allen and he was an elite shooter. And get this, he played 18 seasons and only did it a total of 5 times.

**Just checked and Pierce did it twice. Once in 2010 and once in 2011, but you get the point.

[warriorfan]

Not sure many were in that era. Don't think Kobe, AI, T-Mac, Vince, Houston, Finley, Pierce, or even Redd had a 60% TS% season from 2000-10. The only one who was really doing it was Ray Allen and he was an elite shooter. And get this, he played 18 seasons and only did it a total of 5 times.

**Just checked and Pierce did it twice. Once in 2010 and once in 2011, but you get the point.

yeah I had an argument with a friend a little while back about this and I told him to go look at every top wing from that era and tell me what you find. lol.

[Phoenix]

kobe got shut down by a GOAT defense in legit probability the toughest defensive era. the league had to rewrite the rule book because of them



The Spurs were the top DRtg team that year, and Kobe was a respectable 26ppg/46% in overcoming them two rounds earlier.

The Lakers couldn't stop Detroit. Mailman was injured. Kobe thought taking 30 more shots than Shaq who was averaging 26ppg/63% was the smart play. Take your pick.

[warriorfan]

The Spurs were the top DRtg team that year, and Kobe was a respectable 26ppg/46% in overcoming them two rounds earlier.

The Lakers couldn't stop Detroit. Mailman was injured. Kobe thought taking 30 more shots than Shaq who was averaging 26ppg/63% was the smart play. Take your pick.

That Detroit team was one of the best defensive teams of all time in probably the toughest defensive era ever in the NBA

If you want to say this statement is false, go for it

[warriorfan]

Is she really a she? The last female I remember posting here was eons ago.

Earlier in this thread she said she is a woman and she’s been watching basketball for along time then Arbitrary Water tried to dismiss her opinion like she didn’t know what she’s talking about. When she actually watched the games he’s trying to pretend to know so much about. :lol

[Phoenix]

That Detroit team was one of the best defensive teams of all time in probably the toughest defensive era ever in the NBA

If you want to say this statement is false, go for it

You're equally free to go for whichever of my above statements you believe to be false.

[elementally morale]

Earlier in this thread she said she is a woman and she’s been watching basketball for along time then Arbitrary Water tried to dismiss her opinion like she didn’t know what she’s talking about. When she actually watched the games he’s trying to pretend to know so much about. :lol

Great. Here are some flowers for her then. :cheers:

https://www.flowersfromthefarm.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Ravenshill-Flower-Farm.-cut-flower-bucket-with-blues-and-pinks-summer.landscape-1024x683.jpg

[warriorfan]

You're equally free to go for whichever of my above statements you believe to be false.

spurs being an amazing defensive team doesn’t make detroit’s any worse

that’s not how it works

i’m not going to dig for stats and i’m not trying to be rude but if you don’t believe the 04 Pistons was one of the best defensive teams of all time…

I’m sorry just gonna have to disengage from this conversation

[warriorfan]

Great. Here are some flowers for her then. :cheers:

https://www.flowersfromthefarm.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Ravenshill-Flower-Farm.-cut-flower-bucket-with-blues-and-pinks-summer.landscape-1024x683.jpg

:lol

she deserves them :cheers:

[tontoz]

Not sure many were in that era. Don't think Kobe, AI, T-Mac, Vince, Houston, Finley, Pierce, or even Redd had a 60% TS% season from 2000-10. The only one who was really doing it was Ray Allen and he was an elite shooter. And get this, he played 18 seasons and only did it a total of 5 times.

**Just checked and Pierce did it twice. Once in 2010 and once in 2011, but you get the point.



None of those guys are considered top 10 players, or even close. Not only did Pierce do it twice, he also had seasons of 59.9 and 59.5.

MJ had 4 straight seasons of 60% TS even though he didn't shoot many 3s. Kobe shot far more 3s which should help his efficiency relative to MJ.

[warriorfan]

What I find somewhat fascinating is how people can hate on a player they never watched and don’t know much about.

When I was a child maybe 6-8 years old I remember my first ever attempt at learning more about the players of the game from….the back of basketball trading cards. That was pretty much all we had to go with back then. A sports center update or the newspaper isn’t going to have much information about older players. We would read the backs of cards and look at their numbers. What’s funny about this is this was our earliest most rudimentary attempt of figuring out who’s better….and it was career totals, lol. Which of course much later we learned doesn’t mean nearly as much as we thought it did (which is funny because lebron guys still use this grade school analysis of career totals) But that’s another post for another time.


Eventually we came across a sports almanac and when we got to Wilt. Holy ****. My mind went the same place it went when in school your teacher tries to describe how there are more stars than grains of sand in all of the earth’s beaches. Completely stretching the imagination.

I was a warriors fan but was a huge MJ fan obviously. I didnt immediately instinctually (or ever in that case) go into a frenzy about “BS! NO WAY HE HAS MORE POINTS THAN JORDAN. THIS IS BULLSHIT. WILT SUCKS!!!!

I don’t know what happened. But it seemed to be this used to not be a thing.

[elementally morale]

None of those guys are considered top 10 players, or even close. Not only did Pierce do it twice, he also had seasons of 59.9 and 59.5.

MJ had 4 straight seasons of 60% TS even though he didn't shoot many 3s. Kobe shot far more 3s which should help his efficiency relative to MJ.

Taking nearly all end of the shotclock and end of the quarter shots didn't help him in this regard. But sure, he took plenty of crazy (meaning: bad) shots. It was a part of him being him. Sometimes it was very frustrating, yes. However, many good things also happened. Out of 3-4 insanely difficult shots he usually made one. Sometimes two. And the were periods when he just couldn't miss. So as much as this bad shot selection affected him badly, it also made him Kobe. You can literally make a 10 minute long highlight packed with crazy shots and you will not see the same shot twice.

I'll say it again: greatness is more than being a good player. Greatness is memories. Greatness is when kids 10,000 miles away throw something near a bin and they yell 'Kobe'. The 'Mamba mentality' is a real thing among ballers. The list goes on.

Greatness is this, here, this very thread. A thread about Tim Duncan? 5 replies. Hakeem? 20 replies, maybe. We are at 210. You have to be great to be discussed this much, especially if you are not a clear cut top 10 player and it's like 15 years ago when your actual play mattered. This is greatness.

[Phoenix]

spurs being an amazing defensive team doesn’t make detroit’s any worse

that’s not how it works

i’m not going to dig for stats and i’m not trying to be rude but if you don’t believe the 04 Pistons was one of the best defensive teams of all time…

I’m sorry just gonna have to disengage from this conversation

Nothing I've said argues against Detroit's defensive prowess. The point in bringing up San Antonio is to say they were actually the number one ranked defensive team in 04, and Kobe played much better against them. That's not an opinion-based comment, that's what happened.

It's also factual that Shaq was being single-covered and a better scoring option in the context of how Detroit was defending LA. Here's where my opinion comes into play, the better strategy would have been to feature Shaq more in the offense and pressure the Pistons interior D, not Kobe forcing shots over double teams or Tayshaun Prince, effectively playing into their hands.

All that said, I also said that going more through Shaq doesn't change the outcome, but it's probably a more competitive series.

Every single all-timer has had a bad series. I saw live when Jordan went 9-35 against Miami or something like that in 97. Shit happens.

[warriorfan]

None of those guys are considered top 10 players, or even close. Not only did Pierce do it twice, he also had seasons of 59.9 and 59.5.

MJ had 4 straight seasons of 60% TS even though he didn't shoot many 3s. Kobe shot far more 3s which should help his efficiency relative to MJ.

I don’t think anyone here is arguing Kobe is as good as Michael Jordan

When you look at Kobe’s TS relative to league average and his peers it’s not bad at all

Mix this with his defense, playmaking, and countless other intangibles

It’s not a stretch to say he was one of the greatest players of all time.

If people (not necessarily saying you) want to hyperfocus on FG% while ignoring all other factors then fine.

It’s just not a very accurate representation of what really happened.

[warriorfan]

Nothing I've said argues against Detroit's defensive prowess. The point in bringing up San Antonio is to say they were actually the number one ranked defensive team in 04, and Kobe played much better against them. That's not an opinion-based comment, that's what happened.

It's also factual that Shaq was being single-covered and a better scoring option in the context of how Detroit was defending LA. Here's where my opinion comes into play, the better strategy would have been to feature Shaq more in the offense and pressure the Pistons interior D, not Kobe forcing shots over double teams or Tayshaun Prince, effectively playing into their hands.

All that said, I also said that going more through Shaq doesn't change the outcome, but it's probably a more competitive series.

Every single all-timer has had a bad series. I saw live when Jordan went 9-35 against Miami or something like that in 97. Shit happens.

So Kobe torched one of the best defenses then sputtered vs another one

Look out! Guys I think Kobe just fell out of the top 100!!!!

[tontoz]

There are a lot of great players who aren't considered top ten players. That is a very select group.

Kobe had everything necessary to be in that group but his shot selection keeps him out for me, and for a lot of other people too it seems.

Saying a guy isn't top 10 all time isn't like calling him a scrub but some here seem to take it that way.

[warriorfan]

There are a lot of great players who aren't considered top ten players. That is a very select group.

Kobe had everything necessary to be in that group but his shot selection keeps him out for me, and for a lot of other people too it seems.

Saying a guy isn't top 10 all time isn't like calling him a scrub but some here seem to take it that way.

That’s fair. I honestly have pretty much given up on hard rankings awhile ago. If someone has him just outside the top 10 that seems somewhat reasonable. When people start to say 15-20 it’s like c’mon now, I hope you are trolling.

[elementally morale]

There are a lot of great players who aren't considered top ten players. That is a very select group.

Kobe had everything necessary to be in that group but his shot selection keeps him out for me, and for a lot of other people too it seems.

Saying a guy isn't top 10 all time isn't like calling him a scrub but some here seem to take it that way.

Polarizing figure even in his death. That in itself is saying a lot. Most top 10 players you cannot make this long a thread about. People just don't care that much. I'm happy with my 'top 5-15 since 1980' categorization and it is especially because of what you've just reiterated: very few spots for too many greats. Does it matter if he is top 8, 12 or 17? Not really. We talk about it regardless. And it just means he was great. We care. This way or that way. I'm not sure you can ask for more as a player.

[1987_Lakers]

That’s fair. I honestly have pretty much given up on hard rankings awhile ago.

You gave up once you realized Curry would never be ranked ahead of LeBron.

[Phoenix]

So Kobe torched one of the best defenses then sputtered vs another one

Look out! Guys I think Kobe just fell out of the top 100!!!!

Except I said several pages ago that Kobe's career just from 2004-2013 post Shaq warrants top 15 status, never mind what he achieved playing with Shaq. Reacting with wild hyperbole when there's no evidence I'm hating on Kobe seems wasted energy on your part, but go for it.

[warriorfan]

Except I said several pages ago that Kobe's career just from 2004-2013 post Shaq warrants top 15 status, never mind what he achieved playing with Shaq. Reacting with wild hyperbole when there's no evidence I'm hating on Kobe seems wasted energy on your part, but go for it.

Sorry not trying to be rude but when you tried to say Detroit 04 wasn’t a goat defensive team because the spurs, felt like a troll post.

[warriorfan]

During the 2004 Pistons playoff run they gave up more than 100 points only once. (And it because the game had to go into triple overtime)

[Phoenix]

Sorry not trying to be rude but when you tried to say Detroit 04 wasn’t a goat defensive team because the spurs, felt like a troll post.

I didn't try to say anything of the sort. I said San Antonio was the number one ranked defensive team in 2004. It was tangential to the conversation when discussing Kobe's ability to attack elite defense. You determined this meant I was arguing that Detroit wasn't a GOAT defense, which wasn't even remotely inferred on my part. What I DID say/suggest/infer, is Kobe played into Detroit's GOAT defensive hands by forcing shots when you had Shaq having the relatively better offensive series. The Pistons effectively knew that Kobe would try to attack them by proving he could score on them, instead of deferring to Shaq's advantage on the inside.

[Norcaliblunt]

Most overrated overhyped media created player after Jordan and Lebron.


Curry shits all over Kobe as an actual player and career.

[Hey Yo]

During the 2004 Pistons playoff run they gave up more than 100 points only once. (And it because the game had to go into triple overtime)

But there had to be a reason why Detroit's defense was disregarded and LA was so highly favored going into the series.

[ILLsmak]

I was actually gonna type something, but I don't think it's worth it lol.

-Smak

[1987_Lakers]

During the 2004 Pistons playoff run they gave up more than 100 points only once. (And it because the game had to go into triple overtime)

Considering teams averaged like 93 ppg in 2004, it's not really surprising.

The '89 Pistons gave up more than 100 points two times in a league where teams were averaging 109 ppg.

[warriorfan]

Considering teams averaged like 93 ppg in 2004, it's not really surprising.

The '89 Pistons gave up more than 100 points two times in a league where teams were averaging 109 ppg.

Shows how different the defensive climates were in Jordan and Kobe’s career compared to now.

Just how we deflate Wilts numbers, their numbers need inflation.

[ImKobe]

Curry shits all over Kobe as an actual player and career.

Does he, really?

I've done these comparisons before. Steph and KB got the same raw averages in their primes in the POs but Steph has the higher efficiency. The league is also more efficient in this era by about the same margin and they play at a higher pace (more possessions aka more opportunities to put up higher numbers), so how is Kobe overrated and any worse when we weigh all that in? Steph's a better shooter and I'll even give him a slight edge in playmaking as well, but KB is better at a lot of areas, so I don't see how Curry shits all over Kobe to any extent. You can talk about the RS numbers for Steph but with the Playoffs KB has the edge.

[HoopsNY]

None of those guys are considered top 10 players, or even close. Not only did Pierce do it twice, he also had seasons of 59.9 and 59.5.

MJ had 4 straight seasons of 60% TS even though he didn't shoot many 3s. Kobe shot far more 3s which should help his efficiency relative to MJ.

That is a good point.

[Baller234]

People forget that when debating who's the GOAT, you're talking about the greatest of ALL time. Not the greatest of THEIR time. Would Steph Curry be as great in the 60's if his shot wasn't worth 3 points? No he would not. He would have to be a totally different player.

If you can remove the three point line and reduce that person to a much worse player, then they can't possibly be the greatest of all time. Greatest shooter maybe, not greatest player. Being great at basketball can't just be all about threes.

No matter what era you put him in, Bean is doing work. With spacing and without spacing. With a three or without the three.

[Nowitness]

The same way I go about judging all players – By taking into account their raw statistics (in the context of their era), their advanced metrics, their accolades, the era they played, the help they had.

Based on the above, Kobe is ranked anywhere from 7-12. I without question have MJ, LBJ, Kareem and Duncan over him. I also have personally Magic, Russell and Shaq over him, with Bird and Wilt just behind, but those 5 can be debated.

Some key points to remember with Kobe are;

He never had a historically great playoff run. 2001 is amazing statistically, but it comes with the caveat that he was still his own teams 2nd best player. 2009 is probably his best argument, and in that playoff run he beat 2 All-NBA players (Dwight and Melo). Statistically it’s great, but not historic. He never won a finals unless a teammate of his played better than his opponents best player.

Kobe only has 1 season in his career where he finished higher than a 7 seed or won a playoff series without an All-NBA teammate (and it was 08, his MVP season). Kobe isn’t someone who elevated mediocre players and teams. For reference, Duncan didn’t have an All-NBA teammate between 2000-2007, he still won 3 titles and competed in most of those seasons.

His defensive selections late in his career are near universally recognized (at least by non-Kobe fans) as being erroneous. There is just zero way as late as 2011 you can argue his defence was still top 4 in the league for a guard. I’d argue even after 2004 it dropped drastically. From 06-10, he could play lockdown defence when he wanted to, which meant sporadic regular season games and the playoffs. With that said, he had great defensive wings (Ariza/MWP) to alleviate the defensive pressure on Kobe.

You can take away Kobes first 3 seasons and last 6 seasons and nothing from his career really changes. That’s almost a decade of his career where nothing of note happens bar All-Star/All-NBA/All-Defensive team selections.

He is quite clearly the worst teammate and leader of anyone in the top 10 (he’s there with Wilt and Hakeem in that respect(. This matters to me.

The clutch narrative is just that. Kobe is one of the most mediocre elimination game/Game 7 players of any top 15 player. His finals stats don’t jump off the page (weird, because I thought the East in LBJs era was weak)? He has 3 pretty pathetic finals performances (00/04/08), with 01/09 being very good, 02/10 being good.

[elementally morale]

^^ I like this analysis. A few things I disagree with (Hakeem, Bird) but the Kobe part seems objective. (It is of course subjective, but in a way that's not overboard.) However, something surprised me. As I read your paragraphs I had the feeling you have lot of bad things to say about Kobe, yet you have him in the 7-12 range. (I have him somewhere there, too.) It made me think as to what you would write about some other good players. :-)

[Nowitness]

^^ I like this analysis. A few things I disagree with (Hakeem, Bird) but the Kobe part seems objective. (It is of course subjective, but in a way that's not overboard.) However, something surprised me. As I read your paragraphs I had the feeling you have lot of bad things to say about Kobe, yet you have him in the 7-12 range. (I have him somewhere there, too.) It made me think as to what you would write about some other good players. :-)

I despise Kobe and the way he was, I will admit it. In some ways it blurs my view of him, but I still try to be as objective as I can. I feel having him 8th attests to that.

Give me another player and I'll be glad to dissect them the same way.

[Baller234]

Kobe never had a great playoff run?

In 2010 the Lakers beat:

- The KD / Westbrook OKC team (inexperienced but would see the finals two years later)
- The D-Will / Boozer Jazz
- The Nash / Amare Suns (not the best version of that team but still a damn good team)
- The Big 3 Celtics (one of the best teams of that era)

Not exactly a cake walk.

You tell me what that team accomplishes with just Gasol, Odom and Bynum.

[1987_Lakers]

You tell me what that team accomplishes with just Gasol, Odom and Bynum.

With a healthy Bynum? Not bad actually. It's a small sample size, but the Lakers were 6-3 without Kobe from '08-'10

[Axe]

Kobe stans will point out that he used to have injuries that impeded him in some of his playoff performances before (like in the 2000 finals and 2010 finals). However, it still doesn't take away the fact that it's likely due to a lot of unnecessary and selfish ball-jacking that contributed to those, as well as his atrophies later on in his career. No matter how 'hardworking' he made himself look like when he did them. He probably tried to challenge himself numerous times by letting his opponents dominate or come back in the game with tons of missed shots he had, usually at the expense of his own team. Even the zenmaster became mad about his own shtick. Tho kobe himself was very lucky to have some useful teammates that could bail him out once some situations went out of control.

[ImKobe]

With a healthy Bynum? Not bad actually. It's a small sample size, but the Lakers were 6-3 without Kobe from '08-'10

He only missed games in 2010, and in that sample size they were still worse without him that year. That team with Phil at the helm and with a decent Kobe replacement would still have been solid tbh. If you just took Kobe off the scoring would be too hard to maintain, but if you gave them another wing who fit in the triangle they'd still contend for the Playoffs, as we saw from Pau in Memphis.

[ImKobe]

Kobe stans will point out that he used to have injuries that impeded him in some of his playoff performances before (like in the 2000 finals and 2010 finals). However, it still doesn't take away the fact that it's likely due to a lot of unnecessary and selfish ball-jacking that contributed to those, as well as his atrophies later on in his career. No matter how 'hardworking' he made himself look like when he did them. He probably tried to challenge himself numerous times by letting his opponents dominate or come back in the game with tons of missed shots he had, usually at the expense of his own team. Even the zenmaster became mad about his own shtick. Tho kobe himself was very lucky to have some useful teammates that could bail him out once some situations went out of control.

So explain to me how Jalen Rose intentionally injuring KB was actually KB's fault? Or the finger injuries that were freak accidents, where he wasn't even shooting the ball?

[Manny98]

I have him 5th behind MJ, LeBron, Kareem and Magic

[Axe]

So explain to me how Jalen Rose intentionally injuring KB was actually KB's fault? Or the finger injuries that were freak accidents, where he wasn't even shooting the ball?
Ok, we will try to excuse him from those. But there are some elite players that went through their own injuries who were still able to put up good numbers on better ts or efficiency.

[rmt]

People forget that when debating who's the GOAT, you're talking about the greatest of ALL time. Not the greatest of THEIR time. Would Steph Curry be as great in the 60's if his shot wasn't worth 3 points? No he would not. He would have to be a totally different player.

If you can remove the three point line and reduce that person to a much worse player, then they can't possibly be the greatest of all time. Greatest shooter maybe, not greatest player. Being great at basketball can't just be all about threes.

No matter what era you put him in, Bean is doing work. With spacing and without spacing. With a three or without the three.

Here's a tennis analogy - with Federer and Nadal with this premise.

Without doubt, Federer's game put back in earlier eras when grass was the surface for 3/4 of the Grand Slam tournaments would result in a much greater resume. Nadal (who is basically mostly a clay court player - 14/23 GSs on clay) would fare poorly in this scenario. And yet, they end up in their era as "equivalent" resumes.

This is why I hate when the powers that be fiddle with the game (for the purpose of making money) by homogenizing surfaces so that the same players appear in the Finals and create rivalries (in past eras, clay courters didn't play Wimbledon and fast/grass courters didn't play French Open).

To me, this is the distinction between GOAT (more resume oriented) vs BETTER player (skills based). Steph cannot help the era that he was born into and the three point line or laxer defensive rules are not his "fault". Is he a result of adjusting to changing rules or has he changed the game himself? And does that impact "count" in GOAT points (similar to MJ's increasing popularity in the game)?

[ArbitraryWater]

Here's a tennis analogy - with Federer and Nadal with this premise.

Without doubt, Federer's game put back in earlier eras when grass was the surface for 3/4 of the Grand Slam tournaments would result in a much greater resume. Nadal (who is basically mostly a clay court player - 14/23 GSs on clay) would fare poorly in this scenario. And yet, they end up in their era as "equivalent" resumes.

This is why I hate when the powers that be fiddle with the game (for the purpose of making money) by homogenizing surfaces so that the same players appear in the Finals and create rivalries (in past eras, clay courters didn't play Wimbledon and fast/grass courters didn't play French Open).

To me, this is the distinction between GOAT (more resume oriented) vs BETTER player (skills based). Steph cannot help the era that he was born into and the three point line or laxer defensive rules are not his "fault". Is he a result of adjusting to changing rules or has he changed the game himself? And does that impact "count" in GOAT points (similar to MJ's increasing popularity in the game)?


What the **** are you talking about?

Grass has 1 slam and clay has 1 slam, youre saying "imagine if it were skewed to Feders preferable surface, how much better he would be!" as an argument?

lmao

[tpols]

With a healthy Bynum? Not bad actually. It's a small sample size, but the Lakers were 6-3 without Kobe from '08-'10

That's a moot point since Bynum was injured in those runs and didn't even play half the time. And that is a joke sample size. 9 games over 3 years isn't even remotely statistically signifigant.

We saw what the Lakers looked like went Kobe went down in 2013. Their stacked frontcourt got slaughtered and swept in the 1st round by the Spurs. And they wouldn't have even made the playoffs if not for Kobe.

[ShawkFactory]

That's a moot point since Bynum was injured in those runs and didn't even play half the time. And that is a joke sample size. 9 games over 3 years isn't even remotely statistically signifigant.

We saw what the Lakers looked like went Kobe went down in 2013. Their stacked frontcourt got slaughtered and swept in the 1st round by the Spurs. And they wouldn't have even made the playoffs if not for Kobe.

Probably wouldn't have made it past 5 (MAYBE 6) either way.

[rmt]

What the **** are you talking about?

Grass has 1 slam and clay has 1 slam, youre saying "imagine if it were skewed to Feders preferable surface, how much better he would be!" as an argument?

lmao

French championships have always been on clay. Wimbledon has always been on grass.

In 1988, Australian championships changed from grass to hard court.

In 1975, US championships changed from grass to clay (this is why Manuel Orantes and Guillermo Vilas [clay court players] won in 75 and 77). In 1978, it changed from clay to hard court.

So, from 1877 until 1974, all Grand Slams except French championships was played on GRASS. Baller234 mentioned Steph playing in the 60s. My analogy is Federer (and Nadal) playing anytime pre-1975 - their resumes would not be anywhere equivalent.

[hiphopanonymous]

He's a GOAT candidate of his era - and one of the best all around players and scorers and competitors to ever lace them up.

[ImKobe]

Ok, we will try to excuse him from those. But there are some elite players that went through their own injuries who were still able to put up good numbers on better ts or efficiency.

So if you look at '08-'10 Kobe and compare it to Miami Lebron, the averages are essentially the same in the POs (Kobe averages 3 more ppg while Lebron is a little more efficient, both in the high 50s in TS%), yet somehow Kobe was some inefficient chucker? Like what lol..

[HoopsNY]

So if you look at '08-'10 Kobe and compare it to Miami Lebron, the averages are essentially the same in the POs (Kobe averages 3 more ppg while Lebron is a little more efficient, both in the high 50s in TS%), yet somehow Kobe was some inefficient chucker? Like what lol..

Tough to include just 3 years vs 4. But throw in 2007 and it becomes somewhat more comparable since 2007 is more in line with Kobe's peak.

PS Kobe '07-10: 30/6/5/2 on 57% TS%
PS LeBron '11-'14: 27/8/6/2 on 60% TS%

LeBron was in the finals 4 years. Kobe was in the finals 3 years. Both won 2 championships and 2 FMVPs.

This is why I did that overlap of opponents they both had faced in similar years. I think it closes the gap because most people would say that was when both players were in their peaks.

[Gudo]

Anywhere between 5-12 seems reasonable to me

[Axe]

So if you look at '08-'10 Kobe and compare it to Miami Lebron, the averages are essentially the same in the POs (Kobe averages 3 more ppg while Lebron is a little more efficient, both in the high 50s in TS%), yet somehow Kobe was some inefficient chucker? Like what lol..
Not necessarily he is lmao. Although i was thinking of 2018 lebron (had a finger injury after game 1) in the finals when i mentioned that. But ofc, you won't consider the year since you will just think that he benefitted from inflation.