Where does Kobe rank All-Time with another Repeat?

[Asianiac_24]

With repeat, this is my rankings:

1a MJ
1b Wilt
3. KAJ
4. Russell
5. Magic
6. Bird
7. Kobe
8. Duncan
9. Shaq
10. Dream

[Dez Bryant]

putting kobe over shaq is quite ridiculous, but expected from laker homers

[TAI8]

He's not even close to repeating...At least wait until his team wins Game 1 in the Finals...

[LA Warrior]

After reading this thread a few points I want to make clear, imo of course...

1) Peak absolutely matters when determining greatest of all time list.

However,

2) Longevity matters an equal amount in determining who the greatest of all time.

For example, someone who has 5 years of the being the best in the league then gets injured and never plays again would definitely be listed lower than someone who has 15 years of being top 2-3 player in the league (this is not referencing anyone specifically but just a generic example).

With that said, this is how my current All Time List looks...

1) Michael Jordan
2) Kareem Abdul Jabaar
3) Magic Johnson
4) Bill Russell
5) Wilt Chamberlain
6) Shaquille Oneal
7) Tim Duncan
8 ) Larry Bird
9) Kobe Bryant
10) Hakeem Olajuwan

If Kobe wins another Title and Finals MVP, this is how my All Time List looks...

1) Michael Jordan
2) Kareem Abdul Jabaar
3) Magic Johnson
4) Bill Russell
5) Wilt Chamberlain
6) Kobe Bryant
7) Shaq
8 ) Tim Duncan
9) Larry Bird
10) Hakeem Olajuwan

Solid list.

[LA Warrior]

Magic and Kareem won thier championships TOGETHER. '

Why is Kobe and Shaq so different?

His PER wasn't good enough or something?... please. If you watched the games you know the story, otherwise your too young or just a hater...

Check out Minge's post. You might learn something.

[Tim_Hardawayy]

Check out Minge's post. You might learn something.

You mean the guy that almost totally derailed the thread by suggesting Kobe was just as important and possibly even more important than Shaq to those title teams? No thanks.

[KINGD]

Another championship shouldn't move Kobe up much. He's not even the biggest strength on his team. That front-line is.

[Shot Clock]

Bryant was #1 in the 4th in 2000. He broke away from the triangle (offense) down the stretch in Games 4 and 6 in the Finals. He broke down the defense, creating plays for his teammates including O'Neal. Game 6: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mReel-_6QHE#t=4m40s

Game 6, you show a clip where Kobe is 7-22. He finishes going 1 for his last 5. No where in that clip is he "creating plays" he's trying to be the hero. LA can thank Horry for that win not Kobe...

[tkb]

With a title this year he moves to the 7th spot IMO. Another title next year and he moves at least to the 6th spot.

[microfib4thewin]

And the Kobe overrating continues. Sadly years from now people will think Kobe is above Duncan and Shaq even if he doesn't make the Finals again.

[kasino]

And the Kobe overrating continues. Sadly years from now people will think Kobe is above Duncan and Shaq even if he doesn't make the Finals again.

don't know about that if he doesn't win a a ring I think he gets stuck with Shaq/Duncan.
I don't know how its overrating when your constantly in contention. Maybe your overrating some other players?

[Wile E. Coyote]

And the Kobe overrating continues. Sadly years from now people will think Kobe is above Duncan and Shaq even if he doesn't make the Finals again.

I've found that historically, a player's career is usually judged correctly. I don't feel Bryant is anything other than a top ten player as of right now, and if he has continued excellence for another five years, there's a shot of getting in the top five. I would suggest that despite not having the peak play of either Bird or Magic, he can surpass both in career value, and perhaps even Wilt as well. It gets a little dicey when you run into Russell, Kareem, and Jordan, who I consider the top three players ever, and it would be a huge hurdle for Bryant to get there. Nothing short of seven rings and the all-time scoring record will get him into the top three.

[NO-KG-AI]

And the Kobe overrating continues. Sadly years from now people will think Kobe is above Duncan and Shaq even if he doesn't make the Finals again.

I've found that historically, a player's career is usually judged correctly. I don't feel Bryant is anything other than a top ten player as of right now, and if he has continued excellence for another five years, there's a shot of getting in the top five. I would suggest that despite not having the peak play of either Bird or Magic, he can surpass both in career value, and perhaps even Wilt as well. It gets a little dicey when you run into Russell, Kareem, and Jordan, who I consider the top three players ever, and it would be a huge hurdle for Bryant to get there. Nothing short of seven rings and the all-time scoring record will get him into the top three.

Reasonable post, I don't value longevity like some, but I can see the logic.

[Tim_Hardawayy]

My only issue is the constant moving of the goalposts with Kobe. And I'm not accusing anyone in particular, its just a trend I've noticed amongst the majority of the Lakers fanbase.

In the early 00's, when his numbers were good but not great and they were winning, the argument consisted of him getting championships earlier than Jordan. People said he'd get 8 rings and be better than Michael for that reason.

Shaq left, team got worse, and now the argument dramatically shifted to emphasize numbers. Now 81 points is extremely important, 35 ppg is all that matters. This is also the point where the "He makes more difficult shots and is more skilled than Jordan" arguments really started to pop up, and imo, are the worst ones of all, at least in debating his superiority as a player.

Team got good again, won another ring, and now longevity and championships is once again the measure of greatness.

Its just never been consistent with Kobe. And again, not blaming any one poster in particular, just an observation in my time reading and discussing basketball over the years.

[Wile E. Coyote]

I don't think that's shifting the goalposts as much as determining what his worth is in both individual accolades and team success. He had success early, but the numbers weren't there. Then he started piling up the numbers, but the success wasn't. Now he's doing both, and the serious evaluations of Kobe's career up until this time can take place.

I don't think any serious Lakers fan believes that Kobe is better than Jordan. It'd be nice if he were, but it just wasn't meant to be. The great thing about Kobe is the fact that he'll go down as the "Kareem of guards", with his production over a long span of time. I'm not sure that I can honestly say that 14 years ago I would have thought Kobe would still be chugging along now, averaging 27 points a game. It's really amazing with the mileage on his body.

[SDChargers#1]

I am a very reasonable Lakers fan when I compare Kobe to MJ. In order for Kobe to start being in that comparison, he has to get to 7 titles (which is very unlikely, as much as I would like to think otherwise).

However, what bugs me is the overrating of Bird on these boards. As can be seen in my previous post I believe Bird is a top 8 player of all time (as of right now), but the people who have him equal to Magic I think are a little nostalgic to the "golden" days of basketball.

Magic had better numbers, 2 more championships, has the edge in heads up meetings throughout their career, and is the most versatile player of all time (A 6'9'' PG who played center in the finals to win it? Could u even imagine a player doing that today).

In addition, what puts Bird above Shaq and Duncan? They both have more titles, Shaq was clearly more dominant (Most Dominant Ever? Maybe not, but clearly more than Bird), and Duncan was a VASTLY superior defender and did more with less. Both also have much greater longevity than Bird, which I know some don't value, but I feel is essential when talking about the GOATs. Starting an all time franchise who do you want, guy who is super dominant for 8 years then is injury plagued for the rest of his career. Or guy who is super dominant for 10 years and keeps you in contention for another 5-8 years. I think it is pretty obvious.

I think people get really attached to Bird's 3 year peak (albeit an AMAZING peak) and overrate him for that reason. But remember a) the league was MUCH faster pace, his numbers wouldn't look nearly as good in today's league b) 3 years don't make a career.

[Gongxi]

I don't think that's shifting the goalposts as much as determining what his worth is in both individual accolades and team success. He had success early, but the numbers weren't there. Then he started piling up the numbers, but the success wasn't. Now he's doing both, and the serious evaluations of Kobe's career up until this time can take place.

In a way he's doing both, but in another, more accurate way, he's not really putting up the numbers that those all-time greats that he's being favorably compared to did- whether winning championships or not. And that's the rub: he's just not as efficient and dominant as these other players have been.

[microfib4thewin]

There are two reasons why I can't give Kobe the same benefit as Shaq for the 3 peat.

1. Their usage rate were similar, but Shaq was a much more efficient player. Shaq was repeatedly leading the league in FG% while Kobe was bad or mediocre on efficiency from game to game. His 00 and 01 season were probably his absolute peak, and at that time he was on another level compared to everyone else, including Kobe. I can't call Kobe 1B when there is a good difference between them as players.

2. Shaq did indeed have motivational issues and he couldn't get into the Finals when he had an Eddie Jones/Van Exel backcourt, but him leading an inexperienced Magic team to the Finals as well as winning the title in 00 when Kobe was just an average allstar throws a wench to the theory that Shaq needed an elite wing. Penny was a star on the rise, but no one was really claiming the 95 Penny was close to MJ or prime Clyde, and while Kobe had nice games here and there in the playoffs he was pretty much a non-factor in the Finals and was never at any point considered a top 10 player that year.

With those two reasons combined, I think it's safe to say that Shaq would have won the title in 01 as well with an average star player, and only in 02 did he really need Kobe to be a top 5 player. When you do that in reverse it gets more complicated. If we were to take the Kobe that we know, I can't fathom how he could have won a title, let alone 3, with another star center like Alonzo or even Duncan. Shaq was just much more efficient than his peers, especially in 01 and 02, that I have to question if Kobe can win a title without Shaq to make up for Kobe's inefficiency. He wasn't AI, but he was hardly the ideal player when it comes to making good use of each possession.

The other thing is stability, Shaq may be a questionable character, but as long as the other players recognize he's the alpha dog and can tolerate Shaq joking from time to time I don't see chemistry as an issue, and we all know that his on-court production is one of the most reliable from the late 90s to early 00s. Kobe on the other hand was volatile both on court and off. It's certainly up to debate, but I for one would not bet on Kobe winning a title from 00-02 with another center when you can't predict how he's going to do every night.

With Kobe's first 3 rings in question if he happens to be the best player during those years, then it only makes sense that you don't put him ahead of Duncan or Shaq if he wins a title this year. At most I will put him as an equal to Hakeem with longevity and accolades in heavy consideration.

[JordansBulls]

With a title this year he moves to the 7th spot IMO. Another title next year and he moves at least to the 6th spot.

This.

[sp6r=underrated]

I have no idea how Kobe is being elevated over Shaq, if the lakers win a title.