Skip and Shannon list their all time top 10

[Swagnificent]

Tim was better all around and won just as much, shyt even more
Just keeping it a buck
Popovich sacrificed a lot of Tim's individual stats if that's the metric you look at

If that's the case then why do their peers unanimously pick Kobe? Dirk who played the same position as Duncan says Kobe is the best player he ever played against. Even Bruce Bowen who played with Duncan was on ESPN last year arguing for Kobe to be ranked #2 all-time ahead of LeBron.

Almost no one who played against or with Kobe and Duncan actually puts Duncan ahead. It's only Kobe haters and those who just look at their careers after the fact and rank based on resume.

 

[Remote]

Did you even watch that series? Kobe was the reason the Lakers won. In both Game 1 and Game 5 the Spurs had big leads. Kobe single handedly took those games over in the clutch. So much so that the media was swooning over him like never before during that stretch of games. I remember that was one of Kobe's peak stretches when it came to media treatment with regard to the Jordan debate. As a fan I remember it vividly because it was one of the few times I saw the media give Kobe the level of respect that fans like myself gave him. Which was viewing him as Jordan's equal based on pure basketball playing ability.

Anyone who watched that series would have come away convinced that Kobe was the superior player by a wide margin.

Was it Kobe vs Duncan or LA vs SAS?

 

[Remote]

When it comes to Kobe you can’t help but be condescending. If someone values offense more than defense. Than yes they’re probably going to put Kobe above Duncan. And that’s how most people rank players based on offense not defense. Box score, impact, player tracking, and advanced stats all show Kobe as being offensively superior to Duncan.

It must hurt you that so many people rank Kobe over Duncan. And Duncan no matter how great he was(and I think he’s top 5) is basically an afterthought.

Most people are wrong.

 

[Diondon]

If that's the case then why do their peers unanimously pick Kobe? Dirk who played the same position as Duncan says Kobe is the best player he ever played against. Even Bruce Bowen who played with Duncan was on ESPN last year arguing for Kobe to be ranked #2 all-time ahead of LeBron.

Almost no one who played against or with Kobe and Duncan actually puts Duncan ahead. It's only Kobe haters and those who just look at their careers after the fact and rank based on resume.

I'm not a Kobe hater.
but do you think Kobe was a better defender than Tim

 

[VBM]

Manu scored 30 points in Game 3 leading the Spurs to their only win in the series. Also remember Bynum was out that entire playoff run. So Kobe was technically without his 3rd best player. Can't really compare that to 2013 when the Lakers were a fledgling 7th seed and played without Kobe.

I know it makes you Kobe haters uncomfortable to ever give him props but there's literally no argument for Duncan versus Kobe in 2008. Kobe came into that series with equivalent talent at best and wiped the floor with him. I would argue Duncan's Spurs were actually the healthier team cause Manu actually played while Bynum was out.

4th best player behind Pau and Odom.

The Spurs were the healthier team Ginobili's injury, team forced to sleep on a plane before Game 1. Not to mention getting Joey Crawforded in Game 4 on Brent Barry's last-second 3.

 

[GreatestLaker]

Kobe didn't drop 22 and 17 a game while his second best player was playing on 1 foot. If we don't factor in injury circumstances to Manu, then it's technically 1-1 since Kobe's Lakers lost to the Spurs in 2013 Although props to Kobe for missing the playoffs 5 times post Shaq (and 4 times after 2008) to keep that playoff head to head edge over Duncan. Some true #mambamentality shyt right there.

Lakers were without Bynum and Ariza for that series.

 

[Swagnificent]

Was it Kobe vs Duncan or LA vs SAS?

So you don't deny the fact Kobe took over the pivotal games in that series late with dominant clutch play?

 

[GreatestLaker]

 

[Swagnificent]

I'm not a Kobe hater.
but do you think Kobe was a better defender than Tim

Yes. I believe Kobe was a better perimeter defender than Duncan was a low post defender/rim protector. Now both were great and its only a marginal/small edge. With that said, low post defense/rim protection is by definition more valuable than perimeter defense. So even if both are equally great, you'll never see me actually arguing against Duncan's defensive impact. However, its more of an advantage due to the fact bigs are simply more valuable defensively than guards. Not because Duncan was better at his craft defensively than Kobe was at his craft defensively.

 

[Remote]

So you don't deny the fact Kobe took over the pivotal games in that series late with dominant clutch play?

Was it LAL vs SAS or Kobe vs Tim?

And if you want to ignore that and insist on H2H, go talk about Kobe vs Lebron H2H.

 

[Swagnificent]

4th best player behind Pau and Odom.

The Spurs were the healthier team Ginobili's injury, team forced to sleep on a plane before Game 1. Not to mention getting Joey Crawforded in Game 4 on Brent Barry's last-second 3.

I'm simply regurgitating the Kobe hater talking point whenever they like to diminsh Kobe's accomplishments. I know Bynum was not as impactful to Kobe's title run in 2009 and 2010 as Pau and Odom. But Kobe haters do love playing up a myth that Kobe supposedly had these twin towers in Bynum and Gasol carrying him to championships. I simply returned the favor in kind. Now you can go ahead and destroy Bynum's contributions but just know all that does it uplift Kobe's legacy even more because it shows he carried those Lakers teams to back to back titles with only 1 all-star caliber teammate. Odom never made an all-star team and was always just a good sixth man. Never a true 3rd option on a championship caliber team.

 

[Swagnificent]

Was it LAL vs SAS or Kobe vs Tim?

Thank you for admitting this. Typically when someone keeps repeating themselves they are telling on themselves.

 

[Remote]

Thank you for admitting this. Typically when someone keeps repeating themselves they are telling on themselves.

Everyone knows you move goalposts. Repeating is for you to stay on point.

 

[Swagnificent]

Everyone knows you move goalposts. Repeating is for you to stay on point.

What goalposts? We are discussing Kobe vs Duncan and you said this:

You can’t point to anything that shows Kobe was better than Duncan

I responded by showing you there was something we could point to. When they played each other head to head in the playoffs for the only time in their careers without Shaq, Kobe defeated Duncan quite easily. You responded to that by saying teams win games not players. I countered that argument by pointing out the CIRCUMSTANCES of those games. While you might be right that generally teams win games not players as was the case in 2006 and 2007 when Steve Nash's 2 seed Suns beat Kobe's 7 seed Lakers, I argued that the CIRCUMSTANCES of the 2008 matchup differed. In 2008 the Lakers had 57 wins while the Spurs had 56 wins. So in terms of regular season performance they were essentially the same. Then you have the fact that 3 of the 4 games the Lakers won were extremely close. In two of those games (Game 1 and Game 5) the Spurs held big leads only to have those leads evaporate late thanks to dominant clutch play by Kobe Bryant.

Instead of countering my counter-argument to your point that teams win games not players you have instead decided to play dumb and engage in the immature debate tactic of simply repeating yourself without actually defending your position. Its typically one of the clearest signs of admitting defeat in a debate.

 

[Remote]

What goalposts? We are discussing Kobe vs Duncan and you said this:



I responded by showing you there was something we could point to. When they played each other head to head in the playoffs for the only time in their careers without Shaq, Kobe defeated Duncan quite easily. You responded to that by saying teams win games not players. I countered that argument by pointing out the CIRCUMSTANCES of those games. While you might be right that generally teams win games not players as was the case in 2006 and 2007 when Steve Nash's 2 seed Suns beat Kobe's 7 seed Lakers, I argued that the CIRCUMSTANCES of the 2008 matchup differed. In 2008 the Lakers had 57 wins while the Spurs had 56 wins. So in terms of regular season performance they were essentially the same. Then you have the fact that 3 of the 4 games the Lakers won were extremely close. In two of those games (Game 1 and Game 5) the Spurs held big leads only to have those leads evaporate late thanks to dominant clutch play by Kobe Bryant.

Instead of countering my counter-argument to your point that teams win games not players you have instead decided to play dumb and engage in the immature debate tactic of simply repeating yourself without actually defending your position. Its typically one of the clearest signs of admitting defeat in a debate.

You think team records in the regular season means that players are the same?

The Bucks and Celtics each won 51 games this year. Are Giannis and Tatum the same now?


That’s your logic?
Ok I’ve had enough of this. Lmao.