Printable View
[QUOTE=Cold soul;14879595]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.[/QUOTE]
Eli's a POS for doing the same. Elway had a promising baseball career to fall back on if he chose to do so.
[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]
I don't think Kobe would mesh well with another ball-dominant star at all, especially a perimeter one. He had to be the one taking the most shots, scoring the most points, possessing the ball at the end of games. If someone cut into that, he would definitely have a problem with it.
I honestly don't see him fitting alongside better teammates more effectively than LeBron, I think they'd both require a more specific team built around them than the likes of Kawhi or KD. I just don't think Kobe with his mentality/mindset is nearly as portable as you make him out to be.
[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14879657][B]I don't think Kobe would mesh well with another ball-dominant star at all, especially a perimeter one.[/B] He had to be the one taking the most shots, scoring the most points, possessing the ball at the end of games. If someone cut into that, he would definitely have a problem with it.
I honestly don't see him fitting alongside better teammates more effectively than LeBron, I think they'd both require a more specific team built around them than the likes of Kawhi or KD. I just don't think Kobe with his mentality/mindset is nearly as portable as you make him out to be.[/QUOTE]
This was literally proven multiple times, look at how Payton and Nash struggled to play with him :lol. He literally made Nash stand in the corner and play like a SG in the latter half of 2013. "B-boo-boo-buh-buh-but they were old" scream the same people who say "LeBron had Rondo and Dwight in 2020" :yaohappy:
[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14879657]I don't think Kobe would mesh well with another ball-dominant star at all, especially a perimeter one. He had to be the one taking the most shots, scoring the most points, possessing the ball at the end of games. If someone cut into that, he would definitely have a problem with it.
I honestly don't see him fitting alongside better teammates more effectively than LeBron, I think they'd both require a more specific team built around them than the likes of Kawhi or KD. I just don't think Kobe with his mentality/mindset is nearly as portable as you make him out to be.[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying he is. I'm saying an argument can be made. Because of his superior shooting and off-ball game one can make an argument that he fits next to someone like Wade better than Lebron did. Because Kobe could just let Wade hold the ball so he can exert his maximum impact and then play off of him. And with Shaq, we've seen Kobe make a great fit.
[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater;14879618]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]
He obviously had a poor game.
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14879519]It sure didn't help that Kobe shot like 42% in that series.[/QUOTE]
OKC series
Kobe - 31.2 ppg 51.5%TS
Bynum - 16.6 ppg 51.3%TS
Pau - 12 ppg 50.2%TS
But let's blame KB, despite him being more efficient than the two bigs combined :oldlol: .
[video=youtube_share;IaOsDQOIB7s]https://youtu.be/IaOsDQOIB7s[/video]
Oh yh and I ain't forgot about this either. Literally threw the series away. Bro wide open throwing the ball away instead of shooting the easy J (with Bynum right there to put it back in if he misses) for a 2 for 1 too.
[QUOTE=ImKobe;14879765]OKC series
Kobe - 31.2 ppg 51.5%TS
Bynum - 16.6 ppg 51.3%TS
Pau - 12 ppg 50.2%TS
But let's blame KB, despite him being more efficient than the two bigs combined :oldlol: .
[video=youtube_share;IaOsDQOIB7s]https://youtu.be/IaOsDQOIB7s[/video]
Oh yh and I ain't forgot about this either. Literally threw the series away. Bro wide open throwing the ball away instead of shooting the easy J (with Bynum right there to put it back in if he misses) for a 2 for 1 too.[/QUOTE]
The pure insanity / cognitive dissonance to blame Gasol for this loss when the lakers increased their 9 pt 4th quarter lead to 11 when Kobe entered with 8 minutes left, ony for Kobe to shoot them out the game with brick after brick going 2/10 is madness.
Kobe entered, took the first 6 shots, all but 1 a brick, froze everyone out in an instant.
Classic.
[QUOTE=dankok8;14879757]He obviously had a poor game.[/QUOTE]
wouldnt want you to overstate it sorry
[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]
Was the Kobe Shaq fit even that good?
Shaq’s lob and put back gravity gave Kobe some easy driving lanes, Kobe’s playmaking and athletic slashing gave Shaq easy drop offs and easy dunks.
But for the most part it was turn taking. They didn’t have many dynamic interactions on court. This isn’t Jokic-Murray here at all.
Purely chemistry wise, Kobe and Gasol had way more going. But they clearly weren’t as good if a duo as Shaq-Kobe anyway. Which is to ultimately say, chemistry tends to be overrated.
LeBron and Shaq would overwhelm the West physically in a preposterous way. It wouldn’t even be that fun to watch. LeBron and AD overwhelmed preposterously in the bubble and I barely remember any noteworthy things about it.
Like fixing a cup of coffee, prime LeBron and Shaq rape the early 00’s West in mundane fashion with almost no drama. On or off court.
[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater;14879793]The pure insanity / cognitive dissonance to blame Gasol for this loss when the lakers increased their 9 pt 4th quarter lead to 11 when Kobe entered with 8 minutes left, ony for Kobe to shoot them out the game with brick after brick going 2/10 is madness.
Kobe entered, took the first 6 shots, all but 1 a brick, froze everyone out in an instant.
Classic.
wouldnt want you to overstate it sorry[/QUOTE]
? Kobe kept them in that game in the 2nd half. Did he miss shots late? Yes. Does that excuse that particular play Nope. Gasol didn't do shit in that series. KB had 22 on 7/17 in the 2nd half. Gasol didn't even crack 15 all series. I'm tired of all the excuses for Pau when people treat him as some superstar in retrospect.
[QUOTE=ImKobe;14879812]? Kobe kept them in that game in the 2nd half. Did he miss shots late? Yes. Does that excuse that particular play Nope. Gasol didn't do shit in that series. KB had 22 on 7/17 in the 2nd half. Gasol didn't even crack 15 all series. I'm tired of all the excuses for Pau when people treat him as some superstar in retrospect.[/QUOTE]
[video=youtube;o4lTmal6JFQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4lTmal6JFQ[/video]
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14879533]Kobe was one of the main reasons why the series started 2-0 for OKC, he was horrific to start that series.[/QUOTE]
Yea, not denying it wasn't his best series and he had his fair contribution towards the loss, but the first game was a blowout. Pau went 2-2 in the 4th in garbage time, otherwise he was 3-9 for the game.
You gonna tell me that they lost solely because of Kobe in that series? Not to mention, taking away his contribution in the final game as opposed to others?
[QUOTE=ImKobe;14879812]? Kobe kept them in that game in the 2nd half. Did he miss shots late? Yes. Does that excuse that particular play Nope. Gasol didn't do shit in that series. KB had 22 on 7/17 in the 2nd half. Gasol didn't even crack 15 all series. I'm tired of all the excuses for Pau when people treat him as some superstar in retrospect.[/QUOTE]
Kobe did his job in the 3rd quarter.
The team also performed well without him.
Then he stunk up the joint to historic levels.
They were +6 with Kobe on the bench.
Kobetards try to create this myth about how all of Kobes chucking was necessary, but it wasnt. The team was just fine without him. With Kobe on the floor they were -9 this game.
Nobody makes excuses for Pau. Kobe is just hed to different standards.
This isnt about Pau. Franky hes irrelevant to this thread.
Kobe joined the game up 11, a lead his team maintained and increased without him, and then went 2/10 (1/9 before the useless buzzer beater) in the final 8 minutes.
THAT threw away the series.
[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater;14880193]Kobe did his job in the 3rd quarter.
The team also performed well without him.
Then he stunk up the joint to historic levels.
They were +6 with Kobe on the bench.
Kobetards try to create this myth about how all of Kobes chucking was necessary, but it wasnt. The team was just fine without him. With Kobe on the floor they were -9 this game.
Nobody makes excuses for Pau. Kobe is just hed to different standards.
This isnt about Pau. Franky hes irrelevant to this thread.
Kobe joined the game up 11, a lead his team maintained and increased without him, and then went 2/10 (1/9 before the useless buzzer beater) in the final 8 minutes.
THAT threw away the series.[/QUOTE]
Pau was a negative in every single game in the series. Kobe had a positive +/- in 2 of them. Pau shot 2/7 in the 4th (he went 2/2 in the 4th in G1 in a blowout loss vs OKC's 2nd unit) & was 0/5 in games 2-5.
All I know is Kobe tied the game and then Pau threw the ball away when he was open for a J with a chance to take the lead and it led to a KD game-winner. Pau and Bynum shot worse than Kobe for the series (worse TS%) and that's with Kobe shooting 11% from 3. When Kobe had his best game of the series in elimination, neither of them showed up in the 2nd half (2/12 combined) and they got blown out.
Keep making excuses for Pau.
[B][SIZE=5]Okay question for the thread aside from Jordan what other Shooting Guard would you rank ahead of Kobe[/SIZE][/B]
[QUOTE=John8204;14880253][B][SIZE=5]Okay question for the thread aside from Jordan what other Shooting Guard would you rank ahead of Kobe[/SIZE][/B][/QUOTE]
Wade
[QUOTE=HoopsNY;14880261]Wade[/QUOTE]
Peak for peak? Yeah, you could definitely make that argument.
All-time though? He's a good 10-15 spots behind Kobe :lol
[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14880265]Peak for peak? Yeah, you could definitely make that argument.
All-time though? He's a good 10-15 spots behind Kobe :lol[/QUOTE]
Yeah I wouldn't have him top five...maybe top ten I would rank Wade with James Harden
[QUOTE=John8204;14880315]Yeah I wouldn't have him top five...maybe top ten I would rank Wade with James Harden[/QUOTE]
Yeah, Wade is maybe a top 10 SG.
Top 10 SG for Wade is really underrating him. You take Jordan, Kobe and West over him. Others are a hard sell. Peak Wade is just so much better than the likes of Harden that extra longevity doesn't move the needle.
[QUOTE=dankok8;14880348]Top 10 SG for Wade is really underrating him. You take Jordan, Kobe and West over him. Others are a hard sell. Peak Wade is just so much better than the likes of Harden that extra longevity doesn't move the needle.[/QUOTE]
George Gervin and Allen Iverson were both better than Wade in my opinion. But on topic maybe you could put West over Kobe which makes Kobe top 15 at worst.
Wade is in the class with Reggie Miller, Pete Maravich, Clyde Drexler, and James Harden. Having watched Reggie and Wade...I think Reggie was better.
[QUOTE=John8204;14880351]George Gervin and Allen Iverson were both better than Wade in my opinion. But on topic maybe you could put West over Kobe which makes Kobe top 15 at worst.
Wade is in the class with Reggie Miller, Pete Maravich, Clyde Drexler, and James Harden. Having watched Reggie and Wade...I think Reggie was better.[/QUOTE]
Yikes.
[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14880353]Yikes.[/QUOTE]
Well feel free to post your own top ten...Reggie and AI had playoff runs that led to conference finals and finals appearances on their own, Gervin was in the MVP race for many years, Maravich would have averaged 50PPG if they had a 3 point line...Clyde...was okay and Harden was a top ten player for a decade...which is what I would say Wade was.
But if you've got arguements for other people...I'm all ears. But I would sure love to see who we're putting between Kobe and Jordan.
[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 [B]but it's possible that Kobe is a worse individual player[/B] 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]
Can we stop this dumb shit for once and for all please. Don't be stupid like this.
Agree with the rest of your post.
[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14880265]Peak for peak? Yeah, you could definitely make that argument.
All-time though? He's a good 10-15 spots behind Kobe :lol[/QUOTE]
Yea if he's assessed based on accomplishments/accolades and and accumulation of stats, then Wade doesn't compare. But I believe Wade's peak was long enough where you can reasonably make an argument for him over Kobe. I wouldn't be mad either way, though.
[QUOTE=John8204;14880351]George Gervin and Allen Iverson were both better than Wade in my opinion. But on topic maybe you could put West over Kobe which makes Kobe top 15 at worst.
Wade is in the class with Reggie Miller, Pete Maravich, Clyde Drexler, and James Harden. Having watched Reggie and Wade...I think Reggie was better.[/QUOTE]
How can you reasonably make an argument for Reggie over Wade? Wade was a more complete player, far more athletically gifted (which impacted his game while it hurt Reggie's), was a far superior defender and playmaker, and also led his team to a title.
I can't think of any reason to put Reggie over Wade.
[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]
Great post, and great example. Its an extreme example but displays the point well. I'd still probably take Lebron over Kobe because the gap in terms of fitting on a championship team is not nearly as wide as the example you gave and then he has the longevity, but there's a weird narrative that it isn't or was never close between them.
In general, I always thought Kobe was overrated just cause of the comparisons to Jordan - clearly it made sense to compare them based on their personalities and playing style but to me, Kobe was clearly a carbon copy of Jordan, which made them easy to compare and easy to see that he was clearly not as good. With that said, now that comparison is not nearly made as much, he's gotten underrated. Few examples:
-His careers largely overlapped with Shaq and Duncan and he was considered better then both for a significant portion of their careers (and vice-versa) but he's so easily dismissed and ranked below them. I go back and forth between them on who was the best in their era - point is its arguable. Now we have people that argue that Dirk or KG were also better.
-He's concluded and dismissed as being below Magic and Bird - two players that were never defensive players and don't have the longevity that Kobe has.
-People act like he was never the best player in the league, or even worse, there's a revisionist history that he wasn't even considered by the majority of the fans/media as the best. From 06-10 I thought he was basically for the reasons dankok8 said, but I'm not going to argue that point - people today are free to go back and take today's lens to judge him if they want. But what you can't deny is regardless of your opinion, you can't deny that that is what he was considered for a good 5 years. Sure in 09 and 10, alot of people thought Lebron was better, but the vast majority thought he was from 06-08 and then by the time the playoffs ended the next 2 years, probably half if not most were saying it was Kobe over Lebron. There's a handful of players in history (Russell, Wilt, Kareem, Bird, Jordan, Kobe, Lebron?) that could say they were considered that for that long.
I wonder how Kobe's career would be considered if he had more then 1 MVP. I wouldn't say he actually deserves more then 1 based on how he fit with the criteria year to year, but he's clearly someone who's greatness is one of someone that should have probably at least 3 MVPs like Jordan, Lebron, Magic and Bird.
-People look at his stats and ignore the fact that he played in the most stats deflationary era and say he wasn't that good, especially when they compare it to this era. Do people really think Kobe isn't putting up ridiculous numbers in this era? Do people really think guys like SGA, Booker and Mitchell are better then Kobe?
[QUOTE=HoopsNY;14880464]How can you reasonably make an argument for Reggie over Wade? Wade was a more complete player, far more athletically gifted (which impacted his game while it hurt Reggie's), was a far superior defender and playmaker, and also led his team to a title.
I can't think of any reason to put Reggie over Wade.[/QUOTE]
Reggie was a better offensive player tbh over their primes of which Millers was like twice as long. He's a far better shooter overall and more efficient in the playoffs in a defensive climate where games were uglier and great efficiency like a 120 ORTG was very hard to come by.
Peak Wade was obviously better but what Reggie did with those Pacers teams leading them through the playoffs every year and his best ever teammates being Rik Smits and Jalen Rose? I don't think Wade does any better.
[QUOTE=tpols;14880474]Reggie was a better offensive player tbh over their primes of which Millers was like twice as long. He's a far better shooter overall and more efficient in the playoffs in a defensive climate where games were uglier and great efficiency like a 120 ORTG was very hard to come by.
Peak Wade was obviously better but what Reggie did with those Pacers teams leading them through the playoffs every year and his best ever teammates being Rik Smits and Jalen Rose? I don't think Wade does any better.[/QUOTE]
It's funny how you always bring up ORTG when discussing '95 Drexler & Reggie, but ignore Gasol's ORTG in '09 & '10 runs when discussing Kobe.
I personally don't put too much value on individual ORTG.
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14880475]It's funny how you always bring up ORTG when discussing '95 Drexler & Reggie, but ignore Gasol's ORTG in '09 & '10 runs when discussing Kobe.
I personally don't put too much value on individual ORTG.[/QUOTE]
The volumes aren't even close to the same with gasol and Kobe... so you're doing an apples to oranges comparison. Which makes no sense. It's a gigantic difference.
Reggie has 10 playoff series averaging 25ppg and a handful averaging ~30ppg. Pau has 0.
Reggie also was the top dog offensively on his teams, he scored by far the most points in Pacers history... while Pau was a 2nd option without the main focus of the defense being on him.
It's not an apples to apples comparison.
This dude brings up Ortg at the most random times lmao
And then he makes weird ass qualifiers for the relevance of it, like here.
Um, Reggie averaged 25 ppg in a series a couple times so we can use Ortg for him..
haha
[QUOTE=tpols;14880479]The volumes aren't even close to the same with gasol and Kobe... so you're doing an apples to oranges comparison. Which makes no sense. It's a gigantic difference.[/QUOTE]
The volumes aren't close to the same with Hakeem & Clyde. Hakeem took like 12 more shots than Drexler in the playoffs, but you always bring up Clyde's ORTG during that run. Hypocrite.
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14880481]The volumes aren't close to the same with Hakeem & Clyde. Hakeem took like 12 more shots than Drexler in the playoffs, but you always bring up Clyde's ORTG during that run. Hypocrite.[/QUOTE]
Yes and nobody ever said Clyde was > Hakeem. You're making up arguments that were never stated by anybody.
What was being brought up was the fact that Clyde had true star playoff run in 1995 that's never brought up (until I did). People act like the Rockets were Hakeem plus bums but in 1995 that simply wasn't the case.
You guys didn't know that so I brought it up.
[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]
This is actually an excellent analysis. It's one of the reasons why I wouldn't fault a person putting Duncan ahead of LeBron, for the reasons you've stated.
Playing off the ball is a huge element, especially within a system, and for that reason, I think it [I]could[/I] be argued that Duncan fits the mold more easily given his ability to win alongside and default to other (much lesser) players, while still contributing to a top tiered offense.
I don't think the same can be said about LeBron. I think you need a lot more talent and variations of shooters are needed around LeBron in order to win.
As for Kobe, I suppose the same could be said, but I'm not sure that is the case. Could Kobe/Shaq work better? Maybe. But the second stint of 3 finals showed that Kobe did need the ball in his hands, and a plug and play of any variation wouldn't necessarily yield championship material.
Put it this way...if you maintain most of those Miami, San Antonio, and Lakers teams, but you insert Melo into any of them while swapping out the team's 2nd best player, the Spurs are the only team I believe that would have won a title with Melo [I]because[/I] of what Duncan brought to the table.
I don't believe the same would have happened with LA or Miami. And for those reasons, I think it's more easy to build around Duncan.
[QUOTE=tpols;14880474]Reggie was a better offensive player tbh over their primes of which Millers was like twice as long. He's a far better shooter overall and more efficient in the playoffs in a defensive climate where games were uglier and great efficiency like a 120 ORTG was very hard to come by.
Peak Wade was obviously better but what Reggie did with those Pacers teams leading them through the playoffs every year and his best ever teammates being Rik Smits and Jalen Rose? I don't think Wade does any better.[/QUOTE]
Jalen Rose was an excellent second option in 2000. His game was much more versatile than Reggie by then and he was actually a point forward. Rose led the team in scoring that season if you recall.
I'd also not underrate Smits the way you are. The Dunking Dutchman peaked at around 18.5 PPG on high efficiency in an era that saw juggernauts like Shaq, Hakeem, Ewing, Zo, etc.
He did it on a contender and was giving 20-23 PPG in the postseason sometimes (on great efficiency). Shaq in 2006 was solid but how far off was Smits from him, really, when Shaq gave 18/10 on high efficiency?
[QUOTE=HoopsNY;14880488]Jalen Rose was an excellent second option in 2000. His game was much more versatile than Reggie by then and he was actually a point forward. Rose led the team in scoring that season if you recall.
I'd also not underrate Smits the way you are. The Dunking Dutchman peaked at around 18.5 PPG on high efficiency in an era that saw juggernauts like Shaq, Hakeem, Ewing, Zo, etc.
He did it on a contender and was giving 20-23 PPG in the postseason sometimes (on great efficiency). Shaq in 2006 was solid but how far off was Smits from him, really, when Shaq gave 18/10 on high efficiency?[/QUOTE]
That completely pales in what Wade had to work with playing with Shaq who was 2nd in MVP voting in their 1st year together and peak / prime Lebron Big 3 Heat. I'm not saying Rose and Smits weren't good but it's a fact Wade had far more help in his career than Reggie did and he played in a more offensive friendly era post 2005 rule changes. Reggies overall 24 ppg playoff average from 1990 to 2002 would be more like 27 or 28 ppg in the late 2000s and 30+ppg today where teams drop like 130 points per game instead of the ugly low scoring playoff games of the 90s.
Anywhere from 7-12. I have Kobe around 9 just based on what he accomplished throughout his career.
Strictly peak and prime play though? When we're talking about overall impact and statistical dominance...there are a few players on Kobe's level and arguably better.
D-Wade was one of those guys. For example, I'd take him from '08-13 over Kobe. Really the only thing separating the two was the role played. Well that and Kobe's 3PT shooting. One could say, though, they value Wade's consistency on defense along with his ability to penetate and playmake.
lol @ Reggie being 'better'. Reggie was never on Kobe or LeBron's level, so why would he be on Wade's. Thanks for the laugh :lol
[QUOTE=HoopsNY;14880483]This is actually an excellent analysis. It's one of the reasons why I wouldn't fault a person putting Duncan ahead of LeBron, for the reasons you've stated.
Playing off the ball is a huge element, especially within a system, and for that reason, I think it [I]could[/I] be argued that Duncan fits the mold more easily given his ability to win alongside and default to other (much lesser) players, while still contributing to a top tiered offense.
I don't think the same can be said about LeBron. I think you need a lot more talent and variations of shooters are needed around LeBron in order to win.
As for Kobe, I suppose the same could be said, but I'm not sure that is the case. Could Kobe/Shaq work better? Maybe. But the second stint of 3 finals showed that Kobe did need the ball in his hands, and a plug and play of any variation wouldn't necessarily yield championship material.
Put it this way...if you maintain most of those Miami, San Antonio, and Lakers teams, but you insert Melo into any of them while swapping out the team's 2nd best player, the Spurs are the only team I believe that would have won a title with Melo [I]because[/I] of what Duncan brought to the table.
I don't believe the same would have happened with LA or Miami. And for those reasons, I think it's more easy to build around Duncan.[/QUOTE]
Duncan stunted Manu Gibobili’s game for years, how in the hell is he a better offensive fit than LeBron. Duncan is dumber and less skilled than LeBron offensively across the board.
Duncan’s defense otoh, half the reason he’s even a legend, actually would impact nearly every team the same way across the board. But that was mostly a 5 year run from 99 - 04, his health and motor was hit it miss after that come playoff time.
[QUOTE=HoopsNY;14880464]How can you reasonably make an argument for Reggie over Wade? [B]Wade was a more complete player,[/B] far more athletically gifted (which impacted his game while it hurt Reggie's), was a far superior defender and playmaker, and also led his team to a title.
I can't think of any reason to put Reggie over Wade.[/QUOTE]
Wade was more atheltic than Reggie but Miller was a far better shooter than Wade. Reggie was also more productive for a longer period of time needing less talent around him than Wade. I don't think Wade ever led any team to a title...he helped his team to a title Lebron, Shaq, Payton, Bosh, and Mourning also had a hand in those titles.
[QUOTE=John8204;14880502]Wade was more atheltic than Reggie but Miller was a far better shooter than Wade. Reggie was also more productive for a longer period of time needing less talent around him than Wade. I don't think Wade ever led any team to a title...he helped his team to a title Lebron, Shaq, Payton, Bosh, and Mourning also had a hand in those titles.[/QUOTE]
Wade did a lead a team to a title in 2006... the calls were whack giving him a 100 FTs in one series which was a modern day record but peak Wade was 30/6/6 MVP type guy on a different level... but like you said Reggie lasted longer, was even more efficient in a tougher era, and he played with way less help. People stay sleeping on Reggie Miller. He was the GOAT shooter before Curry hopped on the scene and as it turns out shooting a basketball extremely well matters a lot in basketball.
[QUOTE=guy;14880469]Great post, and great example. Its an extreme example but displays the point well. I'd still probably take Lebron over Kobe because the gap in terms of fitting on a championship team is not nearly as wide as the example you gave and then he has the longevity, but there's a weird narrative that it isn't or was never close between them.
In general, I always thought Kobe was overrated just cause of the comparisons to Jordan - clearly it made sense to compare them based on their personalities and playing style but to me, Kobe was clearly a carbon copy of Jordan, which made them easy to compare and easy to see that he was clearly not as good. With that said, now that comparison is not nearly made as much, he's gotten underrated. Few examples:
-His careers largely overlapped with Shaq and Duncan and he was considered better then both for a significant portion of their careers (and vice-versa) but he's so easily dismissed and ranked below them. I go back and forth between them on who was the best in their era - point is its arguable. Now we have people that argue that Dirk or KG were also better.
-He's concluded and dismissed as being below Magic and Bird - two players that were never defensive players and don't have the longevity that Kobe has.
-People act like he was never the best player in the league, or even worse, there's a revisionist history that he wasn't even considered by the majority of the fans/media as the best. From 06-10 I thought he was basically for the reasons dankok8 said, but I'm not going to argue that point - people today are free to go back and take today's lens to judge him if they want. But what you can't deny is regardless of your opinion, you can't deny that that is what he was considered for a good 5 years. Sure in 09 and 10, alot of people thought Lebron was better, but the vast majority thought he was from 06-08 and then by the time the playoffs ended the next 2 years, probably half if not most were saying it was Kobe over Lebron. There's a handful of players in history (Russell, Wilt, Kareem, Bird, Jordan, Kobe, Lebron?) that could say they were considered that for that long.
I wonder how Kobe's career would be considered if he had more then 1 MVP. I wouldn't say he actually deserves more then 1 based on how he fit with the criteria year to year, but he's clearly someone who's greatness is one of someone that should have probably at least 3 MVPs like Jordan, Lebron, Magic and Bird.
-People look at his stats and ignore the fact that he played in the most stats deflationary era and say he wasn't that good, especially when they compare it to this era. Do people really think Kobe isn't putting up ridiculous numbers in this era? Do people really think guys like SGA, Booker and Mitchell are better then Kobe?[/QUOTE]
A major reason Kobe only has 1 MVP is that his teammates floundered in many of his peak years like 2003, 2006 and 2007. In 2003, the Lakers had very little depth beyond their top 2 and in 2006 and 2007 just not enough talent. If your team starts Smush, Kwame/Mihm and Luke Walton you probably aren't winning too many games. Those Kobe seasons are as strong or stronger than many MVP seasons in NBA history but they coincided with having poor teams.