How do you go about ranking Kobe Bryant?

[QUOTE=Baller234;14872059]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.[/QUOTE]

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)?

[QUOTE=rmt;14872291]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)?[/QUOTE]


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

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14872262]With a healthy Bynum? Not bad actually. It's a small sample size, but the Lakers were 6-3 without Kobe from '08-'10[/QUOTE]

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.

[QUOTE=tpols;14872306]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. [B]Their stacked frontcourt got slaughtered and swept in the 1st round by the Spurs[/B]. And they wouldn't have even made the playoffs if not for Kobe.[/QUOTE]

Probably wouldn't have made it past 5 (MAYBE 6) either way.

[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater;14872295]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[/QUOTE]

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.

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.

[QUOTE=Axe;14872284]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.[/QUOTE]

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..

[QUOTE=ImKobe;14872350]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..[/QUOTE]

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.

Anywhere between 5-12 seems reasonable to me

[QUOTE=ImKobe;14872350]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..[/QUOTE]
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.

[QUOTE=Nowitness;14872256]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.[/QUOTE]

Magic Johnson.

[QUOTE=rmt;14872316]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.[/QUOTE]


What kind of useless analogy is that?


"If surfaces were supremely skewed to one players liking, their slam totals would be different!" lol?

[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater;14872487]What kind of useless analogy is that?


"If surfaces were supremely skewed to one players liking, their slam totals would be different!" lol?[/QUOTE]

You do understand it, the concept is not hard. If the environment suits you better you seem better than you would in a different environment. And vice versa. More indoor tournaments, more power to Becker.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14872262]With a healthy Bynum? Not bad actually. It's a small sample size, but the Lakers were 6-3 without Kobe from '08-'10[/QUOTE]

Dude stop.

A team led by Gasol, Bynum and Odom doesn't accomplish jack shit. They're a 2nd round team at best, possibly even a 1st round exit. Gasol was a very good player but they are nowhere close to being a great team or an elite team. Add Bean to the equation and they become perennial finals contenders. 3 finals in 3 years, 2 championships in 3 years. One of those championships came from beating an all time great team.

I have Bron very high on my all time list. I think there is at least a case for him being #2 behind Jordan. I would personally take Bean but I don't consider it blasphemy. Bron is a very special player and a one of one.

But there are only so few players in history who you can say "Give him the ball and get the fukk out the way".

Bean is one of those players. Bron is not.

That's why I'm taking Bean.

[QUOTE=Baller234;14872495]Dude stop.

A team led by Gasol, Bynum and Odom doesn't accomplish jack shit. They're a 2nd round team at best, possibly even a 1st round exit. Gasol was a very good player but they are nowhere close to being a great team or an elite team. Add Bean to the equation and they become perennial finals contenders. 3 finals in 3 years, 2 championships in 3 years. One of those championships came from beating an all time great team.

I have Bron very high on my all time list. I think there is at least a case for him being #2 behind Jordan. I would personally take Bean I don't consider it blasphemy. Bron is a very special player and a one of one.

But there are only so few players in history who you can say "Give him the ball and get the fukk out the way".

Bean is one of those players. Bron is not.

That's why I'm taking Bean.[/QUOTE]
Kobe never won a title with a coach not named phil jackson.

[QUOTE=Axe;14872501]Kobe never won a title with a coach not named phil jackson.[/QUOTE]

Neither did Air and Air is still the GOAT.

Kobe stans are the worst fan base in sports history. Completely delusional.

I'm not even close to being a Kobe stan. I never grew up rooting for him or the Lakers.

[QUOTE=Baller234;14872509]I'm not even close to being a Kobe stan. I never grew up rooting for him or the Lakers.[/QUOTE]

Same. I was a bit if a hater but after his 08-10 run there were no legs left to stand on at that point and I appreciated his game.

[QUOTE=Baller234;14872502]Neither did Air and Air is still the GOAT.[/QUOTE]
Who?

[QUOTE=Baller234;14872495]Dude stop.

A team led by Gasol, Bynum and Odom doesn't accomplish jack shit. They're a 2nd round team at best.[/QUOTE]

You act like that's a bad thing. People clown MJ for the Bulls making it that far without him.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14870954]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[/QUOTE]

Funny enough, I was thinking about that 2012 series earlier today. I remembered in that game 7 where Pau had a crazy sequence where he grabbed like 5 offensive rebounds in a few seconds. I went to see if this really happened or if I'm just remembering stuff wrong. It did in fact happen.

[video=youtube;vXy5zqY3IKU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXy5zqY3IKU[/video]

:oldlol:

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14872570]Funny enough, I was thinking about that 2012 series earlier today. I remembered in that game 7 where Pau had a crazy sequence where he grabbed like 5 offensive rebounds in a few seconds. I went to see if this really happened or if I'm just remembering stuff wrong. It did in fact happen.

[video=youtube;vXy5zqY3IKU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXy5zqY3IKU[/video]

:oldlol:[/QUOTE]
Funny how it had to be triggered first with an airball from kobe's shot. :lol

[QUOTE=Gudo;14872366]Anywhere between 5-12 seems reasonable to me[/QUOTE]

I agree with that. I personally have him 6th behind MJ, LeBron, Kareem, Magic, Wilt.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14872570]Funny enough, I was thinking about that 2012 series earlier today. I remembered in that game 7 where Pau had a crazy sequence where he grabbed like 5 offensive rebounds in a few seconds. I went to see if this really happened or if I'm just remembering stuff wrong. It did in fact happen.

[video=youtube;vXy5zqY3IKU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXy5zqY3IKU[/video]

:oldlol:[/QUOTE]

Bro.. Gasol missed 5 or 6 point-blank shots at the rim in that clip. Soft mfer.

[QUOTE=ImKobe;14879454]Bro.. Gasol missed 5 or 6 point-blank shots at the rim in that clip. Soft mfer.[/QUOTE]


That clip is the opposite of soft you unappreciative mfer :facepalm

[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater;14879505]That clip is the opposite of soft you unappreciative mfer :facepalm[/QUOTE]

Fk off man I was there in 2012, he was soft af and the reason why they got bounced in the OKC series. Pau in the previous game had 3 points on 1/10 shooting when KB was the only Laker who showed up for it. Almost blew a 3 - 1 lead off that shit. He no showed in the OKC series. I don't wanna hear no revisionist history from the KB haters over a decade later man.

I rank all players as how good of a teammate they were besides as well as a person , besides stats and chips.

Kobe

Teammate 0
person rapist
stats thru the roof as a ball hog
over all score top 15 (.)

[QUOTE=ImKobe;14879509]Fk off man I was there in 2012, he was soft af and the reason why they got bounced in the OKC series. Pau in the previous game had 3 points on 1/10 shooting when KB was the only Laker who showed up for it. Almost blew a 3 - 1 lead off that shit. He no showed in the OKC series. I don't wanna hear no revisionist history from the KB haters over a decade later man.[/QUOTE]

It sure didn't help that Kobe shot like 42% in that series.

Considering his career really didn't start until the 2005 season when he was mature enough and good enough to lead a team, I have him around the 20's range.

[QUOTE=Hey Yo;14879524]Considering his career really didn't start until the 2005 season when he was mature enough and good enough to lead a team, I have him around the 20's range.[/QUOTE]
You’ve made this point around 3 dozen times, and it frankly has never made sense. Does this mean you don’t have a career if you were never the best player on your team? Does Scottie Pippen only have 1 season that counts towards his career?

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14879519]It sure didn't help that Kobe shot like 42% in that series.[/QUOTE]

I recall Kobe being their only shred of hope in that series. And he shot near 43%, 1% point below Pau who is a C and 7'0".

In the final game, Kobe put up 42 points on 55% shooting. Pau shot 36% and had 14 points. Strangely, feels like you've only found a way to demonize Kobe for that series and praise Pau.

[QUOTE=HoopsNY;14879532]I recall Kobe being their only shred of hope in that series. And he shot near 43%, 1% point below Pau who is a C and 7'0".

In the final game, Kobe put up 42 points on 55% shooting. Pau shot 36% and had 14 points. Strangely, you've only found a way to demonize Kobe for that series and praise Pau.[/QUOTE]

Kobe was one of the main reasons why the series started 2-0 for OKC, he was horrific to start that series.

[QUOTE=HoopsNY;14879532]I recall Kobe being their only shred of hope in that series. And he shot near 43%, 1% point below Pau who is a C and 7'0".

[B]In the final game, Kobe put up 42 points on 55% shooting[/B]. Pau shot 36% and had 14 points. Strangely, feels like you've only found a way to demonize Kobe for that series and praise Pau.[/QUOTE]


and 0 assists.

That series was a joke in home cooking.

Kobe had like b2b 20 FTs in the home games and they were a joke. He also completely choked game 4 away to tie the series.


Lakers entered the 4th quarter up 9, 12 minutes short of a 2-2 series, Kobe then proceeded to chuck his ass off and go 2/10 in the 4th quarter.


Truly horrific.



In fact, Kobe was on the bench to start. The Lakers raised that ead to 11 when Kobe entered with 8 minutes left and he started his 2/10 throwaway...

To make matters worse, dude was actually 1/9 but then took a 2 at the buzzer down 5...

not enough is made of how embarrassing that is.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14879525]You’ve made this point around 3 dozen times, and it frankly has never made sense. Does this mean you don’t have a career if you were never the best player on your team? Does Scottie Pippen only have 1 season that counts towards his career?[/QUOTE]

He refused to be drafted and be the starting SG for the Nets. He chose to only sign with the contending Lakers, knowing their was no chance of starting for them. When you do that without playing a single minute in the NBA , the you get consequences of doing so.

Pippen didnt have that shitty entitlement mindset coming into rhe league. He signed with the team that traded for him with no qualms.

[QUOTE=Hey Yo;14879536]He refused to be drafted and be the starting SG for the Nets. He chose to only sign with the contending Lakers, knowing their was no chance of starting for them. When you do that without playing a single minute in the NBA , the you get consequences of doing so.

Pippen didnt have that shitty entitlement mindset coming into rhe league. He signed with the team that traded for him with no qualms.[/QUOTE]

I guess with this logic players in other pro sports that don’t want to be drafted by that certain franchise are entitlement and are bad too. For example: Eli Manning, John Elway, etc. All those players are HOF at the end of the day nobody cares.

Kobe is a guy who stats underrate. His well-rounded game with ability to excel on-ball and off-ball made him able to fit many systems (=flexibility) and also fit along other ball-dominant stars (scalability). Even though someone like Lebron is individually statistically superior to Kobe, there is an argument to make that Shaq/Kobe was a better duo than Shaq/Lebron would be. It's not clear cut but it's possible that Kobe is a worse individual player but fits better alongside better teammates which makes him more valuable for building a championship caliber team. That's where I'd start if I was arguing for Kobe anyway.

A more extreme analogy would be James Harden vs. Reggie Miller. Harden is individually better but many people would rather build a championship team with Reggie because his skills fit better alongside other high level (on-ball) players.

[QUOTE=dankok8;14879613]Kobe is a guy who stats underrate. His well-rounded game with ability to excel on-ball and off-ball made him able to fit many systems (=flexibility) and also fit along other ball-dominant stars (scalability). Even though someone like Lebron is individually statistically superior to Kobe, there is an argument to make that Shaq/Kobe was a better duo than Shaq/Lebron would be. It's not clear cut but it's possible that Kobe is a worse individual player but fits better alongside better teammates which makes him more valuable for building a championship caliber team. That's where I'd start if I was arguing for Kobe anyway.

A more extreme analogy would be James Harden vs. Reggie Miller. Harden is individually better but many people would rather build a championship team with Reggie because his skills fit better alongside other high level (on-ball) players.[/QUOTE]


Beyond the stats, what do you make of his 2012 WCSF Game 4, home game to tie the series?

Lakers were up 11 with 8 minutes left in the 4th when Bryant was subbed in, Bryant then went 2/10 to end the game (1/9 before taking a useess 2 at the buzzer) to throw the game away.


Im guessing beyond the stats this ones looks a little better?

[QUOTE=dankok8;14879613]Kobe is a guy who stats underrate. His well-rounded game with ability to excel on-ball and off-ball made him able to fit many systems (=flexibility) and also fit along other ball-dominant stars (scalability). Even though someone like Lebron is individually statistically superior to Kobe, there is an argument to make that Shaq/Kobe was a better duo than Shaq/Lebron would be. It's not clear cut but it's possible that Kobe is a worse individual player but fits better alongside better teammates which makes him more valuable for building a championship caliber team. That's where I'd start if I was arguing for Kobe anyway.

A more extreme analogy would be James Harden vs. Reggie Miller. Harden is individually better but many people would rather build a championship team with Reggie because his skills fit better alongside other high level (on-ball) players.[/QUOTE]


That is a bad comparison. Miller took shots that he could make efficiently and didn't hold the ball.

Kobe's idea of shot selection was that if there was a shot available he would select it. He has the most missed shots in league history by far. I've never see anyone take more bad, long jumpers than Kobe. He wouldn't hesitate at all to jack up contested jumpers early in the clock.

[QUOTE=dankok8;14879613]Kobe is a guy who stats underrate. His well-rounded game with ability to excel on-ball and off-ball made him able to fit many systems (=flexibility) and also fit along other ball-dominant stars (scalability). Even though someone like Lebron is individually statistically superior to Kobe, there is an argument to make that Shaq/Kobe was a better duo than Shaq/Lebron would be. It's not clear cut but it's possible that Kobe is a worse individual player but fits better alongside better teammates which makes him more valuable for building a championship caliber team. That's where I'd start if I was arguing for Kobe anyway.

A more extreme analogy would be James Harden vs. Reggie Miller. Harden is individually better but many people would rather build a championship team with Reggie because his skills fit better alongside other high level (on-ball) players.[/QUOTE]

:oldlol: