How do you go about ranking Kobe Bryant?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

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

[999Guy]

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 could 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 because 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.

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.

[John8204]

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.

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.

[tpols]

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.

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.

[dankok8]

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?

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.

[HoopsNY]

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 stunted his game for years? Can you explain? I don't quite remember it that way and given the Pop system, I'm not sure how that would even be the case.

Obviously Duncan is less skilled than LeBron offensively, I never debated that.

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.

Point being, Duncan could be a dynamic offensive player if he wanted to, simply because his post game was so good. But even when the focus shifted to running the offense through the perimeter and opening up the floor for shooters, it yielded just as good results.

Add his defensive ability and it solidifies a solid case for him being easier to build around IMO.

[John8204]

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.

Yeah I'm okay with people ranking Wade ahead of Miller. Wade was the best player in 06 I don't know if I would credit him as the leader the team had five all-star vets (Walker, Williams, O'Neal, Payton, and Mourning). Reggie was to me a better elevator of lower talent guys, and I do think he's the best shooter of the shooting gaurds. But both guys are within three or four spots of each other. And Kobe was better and more successful than both of them...even though Reggie was a better shooter and Wade the better teammate.

[Hey Yo]

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.

Are you suggesting that Reggie was considered a superstar also, just like Wade was referred to?

[HoopsNY]

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.

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.

I think you guys are underrating the Pacers' cast tbh. Indy was top 10 in ORTG every year from 1989-2000 with the exception of two years. In 1999 and 2000, they were ranked #1. That didn't come on the back of Reggie alone. In fact, I can't really think of any team that had 12 years of producing a top 10 (and sometimes top 5) offense for 90% of the years where it boiled down to just 1 guy.

By 1994, Smits had become an integral part of that offense. In fact, his FGA usually rivaled Reggie's, but during the mid 90s, Smits was actually their 1st option sometimes:

'94 Smits: 11.8 FGA
'94 Reggie: 13.2 FGA

'95 Smits: 13.6 FGA
'95 Reggie: 13.5 FGA

'96 Smits: 14.2 FGA
'96 Reggie: 14.0 FGA

'97 Smits: 14.1 FGA
'97 Reggie: 15.4 FGA

'98 Smits: 14.2 FGA
'98 Reggie: 13.3 FGA

2000 Rose averaged 15.0 FGA to Reggie's 12.9.

Shaq was an 18/10 player in the playoffs of '06. That isn't that far removed from what Smits was giving. I remember Smits in those days, he was excellent in the post with an excellent mid-range game. He frustrated the hell out of the Knicks and Magic.

Btw, Miami was 7th in ORTG in 2006 and 11th out of 16 teams in the playoffs. I'm not minimizing Wade's cast, but doing so with the Pacers would be unfair as well.

[LeGoat4Life]

Kobe is ranked anywhere between 6-8 (along side with Shaq and Duncan)

Lebron is anywhere between 9-13

[Iverson3]

12th

[SouBeachTalents]

Reggie being better than Wade is an absolutely wild take Wade was a BITW caliber player for several years, his peak was brief but not Bill Walton, while seriously, how many years was Reggie a top 10 player in the league? Dude never even made am=n All-NBA 2nd Team and never finished higher than 13th in MVP voting in his career.

[John8204]

Reggie being better than Wade is an absolutely wild take Wade was a BITW caliber player for several years, his peak was brief but not Bill Walton, while seriously, how many years was Reggie a top 10 player in the league? Dude never even made am=n All-NBA 2nd Team and never finished higher than 13th in MVP voting in his career.

Well Wade is being supported by someone who can't seem to make a top ten list of SG's. I have Reggie in the top ten for the 90's...here's a list that you aren't going to do...

1. MJ, 2. Hakeem, 3. Stockton, 4. Shaq 5. Barkley, 6.Robinson, 7. Malone, 8. Pippen, 9. Reggie 10. Ewing
1. Lebron 2. Kobe 3. Duncan 4 Dirk, 5 KG, 6 Iverson, 7. Kidd, 8. Wade 9. Pierce 10. Nash

I don't know if you want to call Shaq a 90's or 00's player but I have Wade and Reggie at basically the same spot.

[Soundwave]

I have him top 10, but if you're talking like just sheer talent level/skill level, I think he's honestly probably top 3-4. He's the second best scorer in the history of the game I think, Jordan would be 1, he's 2. In terms of competiveness, I think he's one of the top 3-4 as well, he was something else.

For people who slight him and put him out of their top 10 that fine, but I think those people even know, if there was some kind of hypothetical basketball nirvana where all the best players were put into a gym in their peak/prime and you told Kobe "hey you're not even one of the 10 best players here" that crazy mother****er would go on a rampage and probably light up almost all the players that are supposedly "better" than him to prove a point.

[SATAN]

I have him top 10, but if you're talking like just sheer talent level/skill level, I think he's honestly probably top 3-4. He's the second best scorer in the history of the game I think, Jordan would be 1, he's 2.

Why?

For people who slight him and put him out of their top 10 that fine, but I think those people even know, if there was some kind of hypothetical basketball nirvana where all the best players were put into a gym in their peak/prime and you told Kobe "hey you're not even one of the 10 best players here" that crazy mother****er would go on a rampage and probably light up almost all the players that are supposedly "better" than him to prove a point.

This is some made up fantasy in your head.