2001-03 Kobe and 2005-08 Kobe is as good as anyone who ever played the game. Circumstances however conspired against him leaving a legacy on paper as great as the one he left on tape.
During his first prime from 01-03 he had to share the spotlight with another GOAT caliber player in his prime. They naturally hurt one another on the all-time rankings by having to share the spotlight. It's why both Shaq and Kobe have 1 MVP each and why both have such few scoring titles. Just think how many more scoring titles or MVPs a young Kobe wins if he doesn't have to defer to a prime Shaq.
Then during his next prime from 05-08 Kobe was on a rebuilding team. His numbers were MVP worthy but he lacked the players around him to win the award and advance deep in the playoffs.
Kobe's career path was unusual. He started on a contender as a rookie. Had to share the spotlight with another GOAT early on. Then found himself in a rebuilding situation in his prime. Its what hurts him in these GOAT debates. His play on the court was GOAT caliber but circumstances went against him when it came to certain accolades like scoring titles and MVPs.
This is a horrible post...
First of all, you're only giving Kobe a 5-year prime, which is completely preposterous and unfair to Kobe. Then you're splitting his prime as if it was interrupted by either an injury disruption (think Durant missing an entire season) or a dramatic decline in play that served as a gulf between otherwise consistent high-level production (think CP3). Neither of these qualifiers apply to Kobe that warrant erasing a year or two of his prime as if they didn't exist...
And again saying Kobe had only a 5-year prime in a 20-year career is obviously untrue. What you're really referencing is Kobe's
peak, but you're splitting it for some strange reason. He wasn't peaking in no damn 2001-03; though those were some of his best defensive seasons he wasn't anywhere near the complete player he became later...
Your premise to start is flawed at multiple points, and I want to say you and I have engaged a conversation on Kobe's career before in years past...
Second of all, his career path wasn't all that unusual. Magic had to "share" the spotlight in a similar situation. Russell entered The League on a team featuring the first great guard in Cousy and had to "share" that situation. Jerry West walked onto a squad featuring Elgin Baylor who was one of the best players in the sport and had to wait his turn to "shine". This is three situations I can call off the top of the dome easily, there are more. It's hardly unusual to enter The League on a team where there's an established superstar and you have to grow into your own...
This is a point to circle back to later because Kobe wasn't ready when he entered the NBA to shoulder the burden of carrying a franchise. He didn't have to "share" anything, he had to develop into a player that could handle that responsibility and spotlight...
To the meat of your post, Kobe didn't have an extraordinary peak. He became a GOAT because of how long he was an elite, Top 10 player, which was at the very least a dozen years, and I could make the case he was a Top 10 guy for as long as 15 years. That level of consistency at that level of play for that long of time (minimum 12 years) is extraordinary and rare, that's how he became a GOAT...
He didn't become a GOAT because he had an otherworldly peak, because he just didn't. It was high, but there's a pretty long line of guys who peaked higher...
Lastly, you need to quantify the "circumstances that conspired" against him and his GOAT case, because it's already established the one you named (that he had to share the spotlight) isn't factual, that never hampered anyone else in that situation who earned inclusion. Kobe and Shaq spent 8 years together. At bare minimum, Shaq was the greater player for the first 6 of those 8 years, and unquestionably so during their championship runs...
If anything hurts Kobe when it comes to GOAT standing:
•he didn't peak as high as a number of guys
•he played in 7 Finals and doesn't have any performance that can be considered All-Time great or iconic, a number of other candidates do and a few have multiple
•he doesn't really have any hallmark, legendary front-to-back playoff runs, while a number of other candidates do and a few have multiple
•he's really the only Top 15 guy that didn't walk into the NBA as NBA-ready, this can't be overlooked in direct comparisons and its actually a testament to his work ethic that he built himself into a legend because the general rule for guys of his historical weight, those guys walk into the door as culture-changers, franchise-altering players, floor-raisers---->but you can't just compare him to guys who WERE and act like it doesn't matter
