How do you go about ranking Kobe Bryant?

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.

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.

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

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

[QUOTE=RRR3;14870549]Kobe did not have poor efficiency, at least do your research :lol[/QUOTE]


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

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

[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater;14870552]I didnt know I needed to add relative to... you know... his all time rank contemporaries, the thread topic.[/QUOTE]
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.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14870554]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[/QUOTE]


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.

[QUOTE=RRR3;14870557]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.[/QUOTE]

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

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.

[QUOTE=StrongLurk;14870570][B]If we treat all eras equal (i.e Russell/Wilt), then Kobe is in the top 7-10 all time[/B] 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.[/QUOTE]


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?

[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater;14870568]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[/QUOTE]
Why are you using eFG% instead of TS%? You can't just take out FTs if you're measuring efficiency.

[QUOTE=RRR3;14870574]Why are you using eFG% instead of TS%? You can't just take out FTs if you're measuring efficiency.[/QUOTE]

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.

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

[QUOTE=tpols;14870593]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[/QUOTE]

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.

[QUOTE=tpols;14870593]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[/QUOTE]


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.

[QUOTE=StrongLurk;14870570]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 [B]12 all-nba defense awards are legit[/B], 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.[/QUOTE]

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).

[QUOTE=rmt;14870612]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).[/QUOTE]


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.

[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater;14870531]Purely statistically, Bryant is not among the top 20-25 payers of all time. His situations have been favorable.[/QUOTE]

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.

[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]

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.

[QUOTE]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?[/QUOTE]

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?

[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]

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.

[QUOTE]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.
[/QUOTE]

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.

[QUOTE]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.
[/QUOTE]

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.


[QUOTE]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).[/QUOTE]

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.

[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]

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?

[QUOTE]
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.[/QUOTE]

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.

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

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

[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater;14870618]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.[/QUOTE]

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.

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.

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.

[QUOTE=Baller234;14870826]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.[/QUOTE]

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

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.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14870831]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.[/QUOTE]

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.

[QUOTE=Baller234;14870887]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:.[/QUOTE]

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.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14870891]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.[/QUOTE]

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.

[QUOTE=ImKobe;14870904]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.[/QUOTE]

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.

@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.

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

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14870913]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.[/QUOTE]

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 [B]The Championship [/B]game vs Spain to win Gold.

Kobe was just... better at basketball.

[QUOTE=Baller234;14870921]@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.[/QUOTE]

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

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14870913]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.[/QUOTE]

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.

[QUOTE=ImKobe;14870944]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.[/QUOTE]

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.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14870945]..[/QUOTE]


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

[QUOTE=ImKobe;14870946]Exactly. A bot reply whenever you're cornered and have nothing of value to add. Pathetic manchild.[/QUOTE]

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

Look how you censored my quote.

Somebody is hurt. :oldlol:

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.