Where do you rank Kobe all-time? (poll)

[LakerLegend]

1. Kobe wasn't his usual self in 2004 due to 3 things: offseason knee and shoulder surgeries which he wasn't able to properly rehab because of Colorado, surgery for which he was in Colorado in the first place, not being able to get in usual season shape because of said injuries, and flying back and forth to Colorado for trial things.

2. Malone and Payton were shells of what they were before, Malone especially because he was dealing with injury issues. Shaq was also in the worst shape of his career and a year or two out of his prime.

3. The Lakers were on a bit of cruise control after dispatching the Spurs in a grueling series, who beat them the year before and were considered their biggest roadblock.

4. Kobe beating the defending champion Spurs, then taking a super team of 3 superstars in KG, Allen, and Pierce with a 66- win record and one of the all-time defenses to 6 games with a starting lineup of Fisher, Odom, Radmanovic, and Gasol is at least as impressive as that.

KG's weakness was always that he wasn't able to dominate games on the offensive end anywhere near to the extent Kobe could. When it comes down to it, basketball is an offense driven sport.

[aol4532]

I could actually see that team taking them to six games.

Let's switch Latrell and Malone, and I think most would agree that they are about equal at that point, so you think a team of Kobe and Malone taking the Lakers to 6 games? By what logic?

I don't think you realize how nasty KG's defense was at the time. He was basically guarding both Malone and Shaq, by standing between them, and disrupting their sets with his length.

[Durins Baynes]

That is not what the MVP is. The MVP is the best player on the TOP SEEDED TEAM. Notice how it is a function of winning and media narrative.

It often isn't that actually. You seem very confused- Lebron's team had the 3rd best record in 2012- yet he was MVP, Kobe in 2008 was on the 3rd best team when he "won", Nash's team was 3rd best overall when he won in 2006, in 2004 KG's team had the 2nd best record, Duncan in 2002 was on a team with the 2nd best record, the same is true of many other winners (deserving and otherwise), such as Iverson, Karl Malone, Jordan, etc. So there's context applied too. The MVP award isn't perfect, but it does give a good indication of where you were ranked in any given year, and as the sample size increases that ranking becomes more and more useful as a measure. It's certainly more useful than "RINGZZZ".

Why not? Oh because you say so. Silly.

No, for the reasons I explained, e.g. Bird coming into a 29 win team as a rookie and making them a 61 win team, Kareem coming to the 27 Bucks and making them a 56 win contender, Lebron in 09 and 10, Duncan in 02 and 03, etc, etc. Where is Kobe's analogous example? It doesn't exist, despite him having 3 years to prove he could do it.

Its called dissonance. Just because you say something does not mean it is tangible or true. No, keeping the same core sans Lebron is not an attempt to win games.

Follow your own logic through. If the Cavs were "the same team, but minus Lebron" and that guaranteed they'd suck, then it must mean Lebron was awesome- for being able to carry these sucks to be the best team.

Like who? No Lebron in 2007 did not "carry" his team to contention. Pistons were injured and old. Shaq was on the downslope. Historically weak East once again and the Spurs crushed them. Funny thing is it took Lebron getting a team MORE stacked than the Lakers to win a championship.

More cognitive dissonance from you it seems- you just admitted that by keeping Lebron's support cast the Cavs were not trying to win, meaning said support cast was bad, but then dismiss the idea Lebron making this bad team into the best team is "carrying" them. Ridiculous.

[aol4532]

1. Kobe wasn't his usual self in 2004 due to 3 things: offseason knee and shoulder surgeries which he wasn't able to properly rehab because of Colorado, surgery for which he was in Colorado in the first place, not being able to get in usual season shape because of said injuries, and flying back and forth to Colorado for trial things.

2. Malone and Payton were shells of what they were before, Malone especially because he was dealing with injury issues. Shaq was also in the worst shape of his career and a year or two out of his prime.

3. The Lakers were on a bit of cruise control after dispatching the Spurs in a grueling series, who beat them the year before and were considered their biggest roadblock.

4. Kobe beating the defending champion Spurs, then taking a super team of 3 superstars in KG, Allen, and Pierce with a 66- win record and one of the all-time defenses to 6 games with a starting lineup of Fisher, Odom, Radmanovic, and Gasol is at least as impressive as that.

KG's weakness was always that he wasn't able to dominate games on the offensive end anywhere near to the extent Kobe could. When it comes down to it, basketball is an offense driven sport.

Malone was a 13, 8 and 4 guy, that's quality starter numbers, and his impact was even higher than that. I forgot what their record was, but I bet it was a lot worse without him. It's the reason why they looked so harmless against the Pistons, once he got injured.

[emotional]

I meant A top seeded team and not THE top seeded team. Carry on.

No cognitive dissonance. The Cavs were mediocre but a good fit for Lebron. The East was injured and old and by default they went to the finals in 07. Not really hard to grasp.

What Lebron did in 09 and 10 were not examples of anything other than incredibly weak first and second round opponents.

[Durins Baynes]

You described the Cavs decision to keep Lebron's core together as a decision to rebuild the team, so backpedalling now with "they were mediocre" isn't going to fly. They sucked. This "they were bad, but they really 'fit his needs' well" is a familiar and unconvincing excuse some fans use, to hate on players they don't like. When I think of players who would fit next to Lebron, I don't come up with bums like Mo Williams, JJ Hickson, Delonte West, last legs Jamison, etc, etc. The only particularly good role player on those teams was Varejao. Lebron would have benefited from more talent, not "more fit", as he proved in Miami where the talent didn't fit, but won titles anyway. Lebron taking these guys to 60+ wins is an example of Lebron being a god in the NBA, with whom very few players peaks can compare. Not Kobe certainly.

And in 07 he still had to get his weak team to the finals, and he did it. Full points. In contrast the number of times Kobe's team underachieved is telling.

[aol4532]

The Lakers were 33 and 9 with Malone, 23 and 17 without. I take back my statement about Sprewell and Malone being equal, Malone is the superior player

[emotional]

No I said they were going into rebuild mode aka tanking and transitioning to a new era

Lebron has almost equaled Kobe in underachieving and in a shorter span. Give it another 8 years.

Funny thing is, Lebron required MORE talent than Kobe ever required to win as THE man on his team.

[The Infamous1]

No I said they were going into rebuild mode aka tanking and transitioning to a new era

Lebron has almost equaled Kobe in underachieving and in a shorter span. Give it another 8 years.

Funny thing is, Lebron required MORE talent than Kobe ever required to win as THE man on his team.

Lebron had 2 all stars(wade/Bosh)Kobe only had one(Gasol)

Matter of fact as a starter, Kobe has never played with 2 all stars at once. His entire prime(01-10) he played with 2(Shaq and Gasol) and never at the same time.

With The way People talk about Kobe's "talented teams" you would think he was playing with multiple all stars yearly like Lebron the last 3 years or bird/magic in the 80's

[richboy]

"Your ability to mesh with other stars is huge in evaluating players."

And literally the only way to evaluate that is by winning. Also, mesh and getting along are two different things. Kobe is very portable and yeah people may not like him, but the results on the court make it extraneous.

He doesn't have 1 title that he has won leading his team in WS. He has a total of 1 title that he barely led his team in PER.

That literally means nothing.

You ignore what I said. When Phil Jackson not around Kobe has shown zero ability to mesh with his teammates. It to the point that players only will play with him if Phil Jackson is the coach.

Lets be real. They meshed because Gasol has no ego and let Kobe bully him at times in the media. Gasol is one of the few superstars that Kobe can do that too without consequence. Gasol was more efficient than Kobe. Was more productive in his touches than Kobe. Had a higher WS than Kobe. Yet he had to fight for touches.

There is always a recipe for success. Phil Jackson allowed a recipe that could turn out good enough to exist. No matter what you cook Kobe is determined to be the main dish. That is the reality of his game. He is going to do what he does. Everybody else just figure it out where they fit in. When Phil isn't around. When the triangle isn't there to keep the ball moving. Its the Kobe show. Pretty much all the other players are left complaining in the media. Pretty much every star that has played with the Lakers has complained about touches except for Kobe.

It means prove to me that he was the best player even on the Lakers for those 2 titles? He has the biggest name and takes the most FGAs. Your game is what counts and as of now Kobe has zero titles as the best offensive player on a team. Pau Gasol has a stretch where his PER is bigger than his actual usage number. He is every bit as good as any big in the league for these runs. He gets credited like an after thought.

This is the thing though. Makes this really simple. What has happened to the Lakers since they stop going to Gasol. Phil Jackson was asked by HBO what happened to the Lakers a couple of years ago. He said he didn't agree with them going away from Pau Gasol. Kobe Bryant was playing some of his best basketball in years. Dwight Howard is winning 59 games all by himself in Orlando. Why all of a sudden the Lakers can't win. Because somehow the Lakers thought they were winning because of Kobe. When in fact Pau was every bit as good if not even better than Kobe.

[emotional]

Man you just posted a mini-narrative of which you expect me to agree with your opinion because its your opinion, right? lol

You believe what you believe. I think you're wrong. Stop beating a dead horse. Lets move on.

[Durins Baynes]

Trust me, Lebron would take prime Shaq over the 2012-13 versions of Bosh and Wade without blinking. This idea Kobe didn't have enough help is silly, and to characterise the strength of teams based only on the "number of people who made the all-star team that year" is absurd. We have enough info to guage his value, and when we look at how he did without elite teams (from 05-07) it's confirms what people thought they were seeing before and after that too (like in the Lakers record minus Shaq, but with Kobe, compared to the record with Shaq, but minus Kobe, where there is a huge disparity). For the record, from 99-04 the Lakers were 30-10 with Shaq, but without Kobe. During the same period they were 23-26 without Shaq, but with Kobe. That is just another piece of evidence that confirms what we were seeing in 05-07. Kobe's impact is just not comparable to guys he's being compared to in the top 10, who all proved they could carry teams in a way Kobe just could not.

[emotional]

You're literally replying with arguments I never made lol. It's gotten that bad?

[richboy]

Also just to say. If not for Garnett injury. Kobe probably never wins a title without Shaq. I don't see them beating those Celtics either year. Garnett playing on 1 leg pretty much stop the Celtics from what would have been the dynasty.

[emotional]

lol ok and if Bynum isn't persistently injured in 08-10 they Threepeat

If Danny Granger, Derrick Rose, Rondo, and KG arent injured, the Heat don't win a title either,

[Durins Baynes]

I'm not one to play the "what if game", I just judge people's achievements in the context they happened. The context of Kobe's makes it clear he was not close to as impactful on a basketball court as the guys in the top 10.

[richboy]

lol ok and if Bynum isn't persistently injured in 08-10 they Threepeat

If Danny Granger, Derrick Rose, Rondo, and KG arent injured, the Heat don't win a title either,

Lakers have not shown they played better with Bynum. That Odom and Gasol was there best 4 and 5. That Gasol at PF didn't work consistently defensively. Phil Jackson didn't even buy in that they were better with Bynum.

Plus the argument is actually regarding KG vs Kobe. KG look well on his way to a potential repeat when he was out for the year. Then played the Lakers again on 1 leg. Not to mention lost Perkins for game 7. It is funny how a couple of injuries happen and suddenly Kobe suppose to be so much better than KG.

[microfib4thewin]

A great coach is a great coach no matter what junction of their career they were at. We weren't talking about coaching legacy, more so ABILITY.

So 2nd year Pop and 2nd year Phil has the same ability as 10th year Phil? As great as Pop and Phil are they both have to learn along the way. Phil when he came to the Lakers was a lot better than Phil when he got promoted to HC and when Pop stepped down from the front office and started coaching. The fact that Phil and Pop won so quickly after they became head coach is a testament to how great MJ and Duncan were.

[LakerLegend]

Uh...Pop has a LONG coaching/GM career that predates when he took over the Spurs. Do your research, almost as silly as when you said Odom and Kwame were on par with Wade and Bosh.

[Asianiac_24]

No they played better in the triangle and Phil Jackson. Just to note Gasol over the years has better offensive numbers when Kobe is out. Plus Gasol career high PER was in Memphis. He was very efficient there was well. The only thing Gasol did for Kobe was be sure he wasn't good enough to take too much credit. Gasol should have been one of the most utilized big men in the league with his numbers and instead he had to fight for touches. The triangle and Phil Jackson saved Kobe Bryant from a career of just being a stat padder freezing out his teammates. Anytime Phil Jackson isn't around its a disaster for the rest of the roster. Dwight Howard was willing to play with Kobe if Phil was there. He knows the deal. He read Phil's book. Mike D, Mike Brown, Rudy T pretty much let Kobe do whatever he wanted.

Honestly though your searching. Kobe has played with great players that hated playing with him. So your stuck saying well Smush Parker did well playing with Kobe. Kobe has played with maybe a hundred different teammates. I'm sure there a few players that have done well with him. Especially if you don't want plays run for you. Just like to spot up for jumpers. Derek Fisher perfect player next to Kobe. Odom. He doesn't even like to score. Perfect next to Kobe.

To win titles you need superstar players and Kobe is hell to play with for other high usage players. Kobe himself has said this. It doesn't matter who Kobe plays with. If you play with him you have to change your usage and your style. Kobe has no ability to play a different style. He gets all his self worth in aggressive scoring. If David Stern had not blocked the Gasol/Paul trade right now we be having is Kobe the most difficult player in league history to play with threads. As we watch Kobe rack up 30 plus usage playing with Howard and Paul. Suddenly Steve Nash sucked offensively with the Lakers and everything had to be run with Kobe. People tossed it to the side because of Nash's age. Every year I keep thinking Kobe not going to need to shoot so much this year. Every year he jacking them up at the top of the league.

Your ability to mesh with other stars is huge in evaluating players. This isn't a game of one on one. This is a team game and to win you need great teammates. Pretty much any great player I put next to Kobe I know expect them to see less touches and get less production. Of course I'm sure Smush Parker will make up for it.

Pau and Bynum's FG% actually dropped dramatically when Kobe went out. Their volume might go up, but their FG% dropped a ton (especially Bynum). Who exactly played worse with Kobe? Can you name anyone that was worse with Kobe?

Blaming Nash's problems last year on Kobe is just laughable because a) Nash is old and injured and b) when Kobe was letting Nash do his thing and dropping 30 ppg on 60+ TS%, the Lakers were losing like crazy. The Lakers just don't have the shooters for Nash's playstyle, and the fact that Dwight just straight up REFUSES to run pick and rolls with Nash didn't help either.

"Ability to mesh with other stars is huge in evaluating players". Now tell me which star sucked playing with Kobe. Shaq had his prime years with Kobe. Gasol had his best years with Kobe. It's funny you keep spewing out your same agenda over and over again, yet does not recognize the simple fact that stars when teamed up together almost always have decreased touches and volume production. Dwyane Wade went from 30 ppg player and a potential MVP to a 20 PPG player and a role player with LeBron. Chris Bosh went from being one of the best PFs in this league to a mid range jump shooter. If there is anyone that has problems meshing, its LeBron and not Kobe.