Tim Duncan vs Kobe Bryant - Year by Year since 1998

[L.A. Jazz]

i saw both from the beginning in the NBA and until 2006 i would have picked Tim over Kobe. Kobe 2002-2006 wasnt far off but Tim was winning as the best player and winning MVPs against Shaq, KG, Nowitzki, CWebb, ...

And dont tell me what Shaq or magazine covers were saying. both shouldnt be taken too serious.

[Mr. Jabbar]

98 and 99 duncan, the rest is kobe

[sportjames23]

Clearly Duncan > Kobe.

Clearly Encre92 = fakkit

[Spurs5Rings2014]

1998 - Duncan
1999 - Duncan
2000 - Duncan
2001 - Duncan
2002 - Duncan
2003 - Duncan
2004 - Duncan
2005 - Duncan
2006 - Duncan
2007 - Duncan
2008 - Duncan
2009 - Duncan
2010 - Duncan
2011 - Duncan
2012 - Duncan
2013 - Duncan
2014 - Duncan

[ImKobe]

1998 - Duncan
1999 - Duncan
2000 - Duncan
2001 - Duncan
2002 - Duncan (MVP)
2003 - Duncan
2004 - Duncan
2005 - Duncan
2006 - Duncan
2007 - Duncan
2008 - Kobe
2009 - Kobe
2010 - Kobe
2011 - Kobe
2012 - Kobe

2000 is debatable, Duncan was injured and did not play in the Playoffs while Kobe played a huge role in getting his team to the Finals and had one great Finals game. Kobe had the better season legacy-wise with adding a ring to his total.

Kobe led the most dominant Playoff team in winshares in 2001, 30/7/6 championship run

2002 is Kobe clearly, as he was great in the Spurs series and even better in the Finals

2006 - , Kobe was clearly the best in the league and stuck on the worst team in the league while Spurs epicly choked against the Mavs, Dirk took a huge shit on Duncan all series while Kobe managed to outscore the same Mavs team in 3 quarters.

2007 could go either way, Parker being a bigger contributor in the Finals and the bs calls in the Phoenix series lead me to believe Duncan had an off-year, as he played sub-par in the Playoffs for his standards and was bailed out by either his teammates or the refs.

and 2008-2013 it's clearly Kobe, before he went down with the achilles injury.

Duncan had some legit years and his 2003 season is as good as any from Kobe's (I think very equal to Kobe's 2001 run), Kobe has the edge in terms of being the better player in more NBA seasons, especially during their peaks, plus he's 4 - 2 in the POs against Duncan.

[Combat Wombat]

When you compare 2 of the best of the 2000's year by year for there career starting from the time when both were in the league (1998), who would say was the better player in each season?

1998 - Duncan
1999 - Duncan
2000 - Duncan
2001 - Kobe
2002 - Duncan
2003 - HGHbe (was a beast in 03.)
2004 - Duncan
2005 - Duncan
2006 - Kobe
2007 - Kobe
2008 - Kobe
2009 - Kobe
2010 - Kobe
2011 - Kobe
2012 - Kobe

2000-2003 is up for debate.

[T_L_P]

2000 is debatable, Duncan was injured and did not play in the Playoffs while Kobe played a huge role in getting his team to the Finals and had one great Finals game. Kobe had the better season legacy-wise with adding a ring to his total.

Kobe led the most dominant Playoff team in winshares in 2001, 30/7/6 championship run

2002 is Kobe clearly, as he was great in the Spurs series and even better in the Finals

2006 - , Kobe was clearly the best in the league and stuck on the worst team in the league while Spurs epicly choked against the Mavs, Dirk took a huge shit on Duncan all series while Kobe managed to outscore the same Mavs team in 3 quarters.

2007 could go either way, Parker being a bigger contributor in the Finals and the bs calls in the Phoenix series lead me to believe Duncan had an off-year, as he played sub-par in the Playoffs for his standards and was bailed out by either his teammates or the refs.

and 2008-2013 it's clearly Kobe, before he went down with the achilles injury.

Duncan had some legit years and his 2003 season is as good as any from Kobe's (I think very equal to Kobe's 2001 run), Kobe has the edge in terms of being the better player in more NBA seasons, especially during their peaks, plus he's 4 - 2 in the POs against Duncan.

How on earth is 02 Kobe? Duncan's regular season was 26/13/4/1/3 on .576 TS%, leading his clearly inferior team to more wins. Kobe put up 25/6/6/2/.5 on .544 TS%.

In the Playoffs Kobe put up 27/6/5/1/1 on .511 TS%. Duncan averaged 28/14/5/1/4 on .550 TS%.

In the WCSF against each other, Duncan averaged 29/17/5/1/3 on .517 TS%. Kobe put up 26/5/5/1 on .486 TS%.

There are homer picks and then there's this. 01 Kobe was easily better than 01 Duncan. But Kobe has zero case for 02. He was no longer a great defender, his efficiency was bad, and his raw stats don't even compare.

[T_L_P]

Oh, and what's this about the 03 run being equal to Kobe's 01 run?

Add up their raw stats, Kobe comes out with 45.2 and Duncan comes out with 49.3, even though his Usage was lower and his team was slower.

Duncan was more efficient (.577 TS% to .555) grabbed 10% more of the available rebounds, .1 more assists (a big getting more available assists than a guard ), and had a better WS/48. He played much more vital defense and was the clear-cut leader of his team, and he won with a weaker cast.

Now the runs are equal.

[Stringer Bell]

Oh, and what's this about the 03 run being equal to Kobe's 01 run?

Add up their raw stats, Kobe comes out with 45.2 and Duncan comes out with 49.3, even though his Usage was lower and his team was slower.

Duncan was more efficient (.577 TS% to .555) grabbed 10% more of the available rebounds, .1 more assists (a big getting more available assists than a guard ), and had a better WS/48. He played much more vital defense and was the clear-cut leader of his team, and he won with a weaker cast.

Now the runs are equal.

Duncan's 03' playoff run was definitely better. Kobe's was great, but Duncan's was among the best ever.

Look at the supporting cast he led to the title, and the great numbers Duncan put up (in addition to all the stuff that doesn't show up on the stat sheet).

[riseagainst]

Clearly Encre92 < fakkit

fixed

[T_L_P]

Question: which year/years was one of them definitively better than the other?

[HOoopCityJones]

Question: which year/years was one of them definitively better than the other?

08-10 for Kobe. 07 is arguable , but since The Spurs won that on account of Parker I'll give it to him.


EDIT: 13' regular season Kobe was better than Duncan imo.

[ShawkFactory]

I think very little argument can be made for Kobe in:
-1999
-2000
-2002
-2003 (Even though Kobe was awesome; Duncan was just crazy this year)
-2004
-2005

whereas very little argument for Duncan could be made in:
-2006
-2008 onward (until injuries)

This wasn't too difficult, as aside from 01 and 03 their peaks didn't really coincide at all.

[ShawkFactory]

08-10 for Kobe. 07 is arguable , but since The Spurs won that on account of Parker I'll give it to him.


EDIT: 13' regular season Kobe was better than Duncan imo.

Not really. It's like what Kobe fans love to say regarding the FMVP and Shaq, particularly in 2001 (but even more drastic). Duncan was far an away the teams best player throughout the west playoffs. 4 games against an outclassed team doesn't necessarily make Parker the reason they won. Had taking over that series been necessary Duncan would have done it.

[JebronLames]

Not gonna lie, I got duncan in 2014 and 2015.