So should Kobe be ranked in the top 10 or not?

[BlueHeffner]

Their primes didn’t overlap. They just played in the league together at the same time. When Kobe was in his prime (2003-2009 ish) he was considered the best player. When Bron was in his prime (2010-2016 ish) coincidentally he was considered the best player They were also around the same age those years starting at 25/26 ish to 31ish. It’s funny how it worked out like that That’s when your prime is. Not when you 35 years old. It’s those mid 20s years to your early 30s. If Kobe was in his prime from 2010 to 2016, how could you argue LeBron was the best in anything when there would’ve been a kid on the other side of the country averaging 50 points a month. And Kobe won two rings in his prime (later years of it but still). So if he did in this example too, then what? Like I said people have recency bias. Kobe’s prime was too long ago for a lot of people. They don’t remember how good he was. The same way people don’t remember how good Wade was. If Kobe was the same age as LeBron and their primes coincided at the same exact time a lot of these arguments would’ve been deaded.

They dont like to hear this truth

Bron stans swear he was the best player in the league since 09, yet he wasnt winning any rings

Then they point to his “stats” being better than Kobe’s but dont use that logic when KD won his MVP

 

[DrunkerThanAMotherfucker]

The Russel era?

If you get beat down consistently by your main arch nemesis in a decade when talent was relatively sparse, and had people calling you superhuman & the best athlete ever, and still couldn’t get it done... your resume definitely needs to be looked at again.

Wilt gets a pass because of his ungodly stats & records but he had some serious problems getting his teams over the hump. He got bounced from the playoffs against Russell like 5 or 6 times in his career. Lost in the finals 4 times, twice against the Knicks.

Wilt chased individual glory above all else, which is fine but I have problems with the free pass he gets on all time lists.

 

[R=G]

Anyone that has Kobe anything lower than top 10 is an analytical stat nerd that only pays attention to box scores. Kobe is 4th on my list (behind MJ, Lebron & Magic and ahead of Kareem).

It’s funny how people put Kareem ahead of Kobe yet he was only the undisputed first option for 2 of his 6 championships, and for the last he was the 3rd option. Whereas Kobe was only the undisputed 2nd option for his first title & was as good as Shaq in 2001 and arguably better in 2002. Plus he never got bullied the way Kareem was by Moses Malone in the 83 finals.

NOBODY, and I mean NOBODY mastered the skill of scoring as much as Kobe. Not saying he is the best player but the variety of ways he was able to score is unlike anything I have and probably will ever see. There’s a reason he was so revered worldwide, there’s a reason people scream ‘Kobe’ when throwing something in the trash can.

Just look at this video

Kobe came in the league as one of the most athletic guards ever but his dedication to the craft made him the most skilled player ever.

The only reason I won’t say he’s the GOAT is cause his basketball IQ at times failed him. Jordan would never do what Kobe did against Detroit in 2004. I know he & Shaq were beefing but he allowed his ego to make him think he had to prove he’s better than Shaq when clearly Detroit couldn’t stop Shaq.

Another thing people hold against him is his FG %. ‘But but he never shot above 47%’, but when you consider he consistently took arguably the toughest shots ever the fact he consistently shot around 45% is impressive. That’s why I say eye test > stats, stats alone doesn’t give you context. Plus other than Jordan what elite guard was shooting 50%? It’s common sense that the further you are from the basket the lower your FG % will be. I’m sure DeAndre Jordan has one of the highest FG % ever but nobody would consider him a great scorer.

He is the only player in history other than Wilt to score 80 + points in a game. In HISTORY, and unlike Wilt he wasn’t just physically bigger than his opponents, he was 6’6 but he got those points off skill. To me it’s even more impressive than Wilt’s game just because of that alone.

Kobe was the only all time great that played with scrubs during his prime. If he had good teammates between 2005-07 who knows how much he would’ve won.

And no this is not revisionist history cause he’s dead, I never allowed the media’s attempts to discredit him while he was alive influence my opinion on him. You’ll never meet anyone that is passionate about basketball & actually play it say anything bad about Kobe. There’s a reason he’s the idol of pretty much every young player in the league right now.

Say fukking what? Lol.

 

[R=G]

Kobe has equaled or exceed a lot of players you mentioned on this list from a career comparision.

Maybe 2 at best

 

[David_TheMan]

Based on what, Kobe won more and had a much longer prime than the majority of that list.

Teams win games.
Longevity in an eta where stats became inflated and ohysicality removed entirely and comparing that to era where there was higher physicality doeant help kobe in comparison to earlier stars either. Imo

 

[JA_Carter]

Say fukking what? Lol.

It was a 1a 1b situation in 2001 clearly. They both averaged 28 in 2001 & Kobe was at the very worst the 4th best player that year (I had him ahead of Duncan & behind AI but it’s debatable). 2002-03 Kobe averaged 30 whilst Shaq averaged 27.

 

[Numpsay]

Teams win games.
Longevity in an eta where stats became inflated and ohysicality removed entirely and comparing that to era where there was higher physicality doeant help kobe in comparison to earlier stars either. Imo

So how do you define a career breh? And when speaking of physicality, you do realize Kobe played through multiple injuries during his career and never backed down. Kobe's physicality never has been in question so what makes you doubt he would survive the 80s? And teams win games work best ways, the successful teams of the 80s were much better TEAMS than any Kobe played on.

 

[David_TheMan]

So how do you define a career breh? And when speaking of physicality, you do realize Kobe played through multiple injuries during his career and never backed down. Kobe's physicality never has been in question so what makes you doubt he would survive the 80s? And teams win games work best ways, the successful teams of the 80s were much better TEAMS than any Kobe played on.

Look at him as a individual player, how did he defend, how did he paas, reound, score, steal, was he efficient, did he make his team/mates better that is what goes into the discussio. When talking about a player as a individual and to me, kobe is leaser than those 10 players o posted and more when evaluated in that way

Kobe is tough but everyone j listed in that list are just as tough and played in tougher arras where they were subjected to far more obysical contact as a norm than Kobe for the majority of his career.

So yeah kobe was tough most all the top players in the game were tough.

 

[Numpsay]

Look at him as a individual player, how did he defend, how did he paas, reound, score, steal, was he efficient, did he make his team/mates better that is what goes into the discussio. When talking about a player as a individual and to me, kobe is leaser than those 10 players o posted and more when evaluated in that way

Kobe is tough but everyone j listed in that list are just as tough and played in tougher arras where they were subjected to far more obysical contact as a norm than Kobe for the majority of his career.

So yeah kobe was tough most all the top players in the game were tough.

Kobe did all of those things at a high level for a long period of time. And if all of the top players are tough then why even bring it up, you don't have the capability of gauging that, its a made up "stat" same with "making his teammates better" how do you gauge that when they all pretty much played with different teammates in different systems.

 

[David_TheMan]

Kobe did all of those things at a high level for a long period of time. And if all of the top players are tough then why even bring it up, you don't have the capability of gauging that, its a made up "stat" same with "making his teammates better" how do you gauge that when they all pretty much played with different teammates in different systems.

Everyone i posted did those things for a long time at a hogh level except they were in the inflated points era that kobe and lebron are in

I dodnt bring up toughness, you did.

I said more physical eta and the rulesets attest to that, not a feeling.

We can look at how a team performed with a player to see if they elevate the team or cause disharmony, regardlesa of the players individual stats.

 

[murksiderock]

Their primes didn’t overlap. They just played in the league together at the same time. When Kobe was in his prime (2003-2009 ish) he was considered the best player. When Bron was in his prime (2010-2016 ish) coincidentally he was considered the best player They were also around the same age those years starting at 25/26 ish to 31ish. It’s funny how it worked out like that That’s when your prime is. Not when you 35 years old. It’s those mid 20s years to your early 30s. If Kobe was in his prime from 2010 to 2016, how could you argue LeBron was the best in anything when there would’ve been a kid on the other side of the country averaging 50 points a month. And Kobe won two rings in his prime (later years of it but still). So if he did in this example too, then what? Like I said people have recency bias. Kobe’s prime was too long ago for a lot of people. They don’t remember how good he was. The same way people don’t remember how good Wade was. If Kobe was the same age as LeBron and their primes coincided at the same exact time a lot of these arguments would’ve been deaded.

There is no one standard definition of prime, and it can't be applied uniformly to everyone because people peak at different times, people sustain elite play for varying periods of time, etc...

We just define prime differently. I feel like their primes overlapped for about 9 years, in which both won two championships, and LeBron outplayed Kobe H2H more than the other way around (though they both got off on each other). If you feel like their primes didn't coincide, ain't no issue to me. There is no one standard way for defining an athlete's prime and applying it uniformly...

If you get beat down consistently by your main arch nemesis in a decade when talent was relatively sparse, and had people calling you superhuman & the best athlete ever, and still couldn’t get it done... your resume definitely needs to be looked at again.

Wilt gets a pass because of his ungodly stats & records but he had some serious problems getting his teams over the hump. He got bounced from the playoffs against Russell like 5 or 6 times in his career. Lost in the finals 4 times, twice against the Knicks.

Wilt chased individual glory above all else, which is fine but I have problems with the free pass he gets on all time lists.

I do think Wilt is a little overrated too. He lost a 3-1 series leads to Russell's Celtics in '68, and a 2-0 Finals lead to Russell's Celtics in '69. Wilt's team was favored both times and in both comebacks Russell was leading the charge for Boston...

In '68 in the 3-1 lead, Wilt was 23.3/21.3/6.8 on .544/.432 shooting. In the last three games he choked down the lead, he was 20.7/30.3/6.7 on .412/.417 shooting, including just 14 points and just 9 FGA in a G7 the Sixers lost by only 4 points. It isnt a stretch to say that a better performance by Wilt in G7 or any of the last three games, the Sixers get to The Finals. Also:

•'62 EDF G7 Wilt went for just 22-22-3 in a game they lost by two after averaging 35.5/27.7 in the first six games

•in the '64 Finals Wilt only averaged 29.2 after averaging 36.9 in the regular season and 38.6 in the playoffs prior to The Finals

Wilt played well versus Boston in '65, '66, and '67, so you could see the potential was there to take series from them. It's hard to reconcile the 3-1 and 2-0 chokes, and the dip in performance in '62 and '64, though. He gave it to Russell at times but the repeated disappearing acts are inexplicable. These things have to be considered when evaluating Wilt's candidacy, and I dont know that any one GOAT candidate has as many blank postseason moments, certainly not versus the same contemporary...

I'm saying all that to say I dont like the pass he gets either. He never would have more titles than Russell, but they lost some of these series to Boston by 5 or fewer points in games in which Wilt played well under his potential, anywhere from 2-4 chips coulda been taken off Russell's ring count if Wilt performs better in these decisive games...

If Wilt has 6 chips to Russell's 7, we wouldn't even debate the GOAT shyt the same way, as an individual talent Wilt was clearly on a different level. Hell, if Wilt gets to 5 to Bill's 8, it's a different conversation. He had many chances to keep dude from rings...

It was a 1a 1b situation in 2001 clearly. They both averaged 28 in 2001 & Kobe was at the very worst the 4th best player that year (I had him ahead of Duncan & behind AI but it’s debatable). 2002-03 Kobe averaged 30 whilst Shaq averaged 27.

In real time they weren't looked at as equals, that has been added over time to enhance Kobe's legacy. Shaq was 3rd in MVP voting in '01, Kobe was 9th. They weren't seen as equals in real time and you could argue Kobe was Top 4 in '01 but that wasn't the consensus in the moment...

I agree 2002-03 is when the power transitioned from Shaq to Kobe. But the three years the Lakers won their championships, there was no question in the moment who the best player on the Lakers was...

 

[Ozymandeas]

They dont like to hear this truth

Bron stans swear he was the best player in the league since 09, yet he wasnt winning any rings

Then they point to his “stats” being better than Kobe’s but dont use that logic when KD won his MVP

Thats how Bron Stans operate.

From 2003-2010 they use “stats” to say Bron was the best. From 2011 to now they use rings and finals mvps. But the logic somehow doesn’t apply to KD and Kawhi who were coming for him stats wise before and have now added rings to their resume as well You can throw Giannis and Harden in there too “stats” wise. They haven’t won yet though.

 

[murksiderock]

Thats how Bron Stans operate.

From 2003-2010 they use “stats” to say Bron was the best. From 2011 to now they use rings and finals mvps. But the logic somehow doesn’t apply to KD and Kawhi who were coming for him stats wise before and have now added rings to their resume as well You can throw Giannis and Harden in there too “stats” wise. They haven’t won yet though.

Who are the boogeyman Bron stans that do this, and can you quote them? I dont see any Bron stans do this, not the frequent posters anyway, yall dudes be believing shyt that dont even happen...

 

[R=G]

It was a 1a 1b situation in 2001 clearly. They both averaged 28 in 2001 & Kobe was at the very worst the 4th best player that year (I had him ahead of Duncan & behind AI but it’s debatable). 2002-03 Kobe averaged 30 whilst Shaq averaged 27.

I'm glad he averaged more points..but money time in the Finals, didn't Shaq almost get 40pts a game? I mean..get real.

 

[Reggie]

You can love or hate him but it's hard to name 10 legit players with a better career or resume than Kobe. Honestly you got maybe Duncan Bron Mike Cap Magic and that's it in my opinion. Bill didn't have the offensive numbers to compare if you ask me even with the 11 rings. Wilt didn't have the rings and anyone else is coming up short other than maybe Shaq. Bird's prime wasn't long enough even though he was dominant as hell at his best.