Is Kobe a top 15 all-time player?

[SNPA]

If he is top 15 he won’t be for long. There are several better players in the league.

[ceiling raiser]

Of course not, but it doesn't mean anybody should enjoy his game any less. Very resilient playoff performer.

[carlquincy]

I think I'm more kind towards Kobe the player than I am to some who just sort of gloss over his negatives as a player. It's a really dishonest form of evaluation imo when people only talk about his strengths and don't want to see his limitations/weaknesses. Even statistically speaking his case for top 10 isn't that strong. His longevity is fairly good but it's really the rings and his place as a Laker icon that has gotten him top 10 or even top 5 talk over the years imo. If he'd been a career Nugget or Hawk who won 1 ring it'd be easier for many people to accept him being in the 15-20 range. I have him at about 15 but anywhere from 13-18 seems acceptable to me.

Without the rings, particularly the Gasol/Odom titles, I wouldn't have him top 30. I had to reevaluate his impact after 2009 and 2010. 1 ring and played in Atlanta with the resulting much lower publicity level, he's probably 30-50.

Wow. One&Done will be proud.

[tsherkin]

Without the rings, particularly the Gasol/Odom titles, I wouldn't have him top 30. I had to reevaluate his impact after 2009 and 2010. 1 ring and played in Atlanta with the resulting much lower publicity level, he's probably 30-50.

Fascinating, and unexpected.

11 top-5 MVP finishes, a couple scoring titles, three straight trips to the Finals without Shaq, repeat titles, at least some All-D teams which he deserved.

But I guess you did say 1 title in Atlanta. But focusing in on the fact that he did win, and he did anchor the team's dominant stretch in the late 2000s, why so low on him? And why the hypothetical mention?

[penbeast0]

I have him top 15, my point was that I was much lower on him until the last two titles, not that that's where I would rank him now considering all that he's done.

I generally am much lower on guys who score a lot of points inefficiently than the common wisdom; but Kobe made me reevaluate because I didn't see the team around him as that strong (unlike the Shaq years) so, for me, I had to reevaluate his contribution to winning.

[tsherkin]

I have him top 15, my point was that I was much lower on him until the last two titles, not that that's where I would rank him now considering all that he's done.

Yeah, I caught that.

I generally am much lower on guys who score a lot of points inefficiently than the common wisdom

But he wasn't inefficient, leastwise in the RS. He certainly struggled in the PS alongside Shaq a lot of the time, particularly in the Finals, but improved once he was out on his own.

; but Kobe made me reevaluate because I didn't see the team around him as that strong (unlike the Shaq years) so, for me, I had to reevaluate his contribution to winning.

Well, Pau and Odom with Fisher, Bynum and Ariza definitely didn't suck, heh. That was quite a good team. They were pretty brutal prior to the acquisition of Gasol, though.

EDIT: For the record, I'm not attacking/criticizing your ranking. I was just a little surprised and wanted to hear more.

[migya]

Without the rings, particularly the Gasol/Odom titles, I wouldn't have him top 30. I had to reevaluate his impact after 2009 and 2010. 1 ring and played in Atlanta with the resulting much lower publicity level, he's probably 30-50.

Fascinating, and unexpected.

11 top-5 MVP finishes, a couple scoring titles, three straight trips to the Finals without Shaq, repeat titles, at least some All-D teams which he deserved.

But I guess you did say 1 title in Atlanta. But focusing in on the fact that he did win, and he did anchor the team's dominant stretch in the late 2000s, why so low on him? And why the hypothetical mention?

How good was Kobe's supporting cast from 2008-10? Particularly the PS. Kobe certainly had to shoulder the scoring loas, Gasol wasn't very good at that but pretty adequate for a second option, just under 20pts a game. Gasol and Odom were never great defensively and the Lakers were quite good those years. Unless the level of competition is considered weak (big 3 Celts and Dwight and spaced well Magic) then Kobe lead well with what looks like below average team next to him. Gasol was never anything special in Memphis and seemed to fall off after those three years.

[thebigbird]

Fringe top 15. He’s the Derek Jeter of the NBA.

[tsherkin]

How good was Kobe's supporting cast from 2008-10?

Very good. And arranged in a way which let him do what he wanted.

Particularly the PS. Kobe certainly had to shoulder the scoring loas, Gasol wasn't very good at that but pretty adequate for a second option, just under 20pts a game.

Raw volume isn't indicative of quality, but he also elevated his scoring from 08 to 09 to 2010. 16.9, 18.3 and 19.6 ppg over that stretch, and he shot 55% FG across those 3 postseasons, a 59.7% TS guy. He was an exceptional second option, and he was huge in the Finals. He also put a fair amount of foul pressure on the opposition as a .474 FTr guy.

Kobe very specifically wanted to have his Jordan time, where he was the clear, focal scorer of the team. He got it, and it worked out.

Gasol and Odom were never great defensively

That isn't really accurate, though. They (and Ariza/Artest) were the driving force behind LA being 5th, 6th and 4th on defense (along with Bynum, when he played).

Gasol was never anything special in Memphis

That is also wrong, but irrelevant regardless; his ability to function as an offensive anchor for a franchise is immaterial to his utility as a Laker.

[Cavsfansince84]

Without the rings, particularly the Gasol/Odom titles, I wouldn't have him top 30. I had to reevaluate his impact after 2009 and 2010. 1 ring and played in Atlanta with the resulting much lower publicity level, he's probably 30-50.

I'll just say that:
a. Kobe outside of LA and on a bad team wouldn't be getting the same amount of all nba honors/top 5 mvp finishes so those couldn't really be used to prop him up the same way they are now.
b. That without any rings he wouldn't get any top 20 talk. I think it would be mostly split between top 30 and top 40. He'd be seen as much closer to AI than to MJ.
c. Without Phil his personality would be harder to manage and seen as more of a weakness.
d. I think 1 ring would get him into most people's top 25. Some people's top 20.

[Ian Scuffling]

As of right now? Yes.

[Owly]

Gasol and Odom were never great defensively

That isn't really accurate, though. They (and Ariza/Artest) were the driving force behind LA being 5th, 6th and 4th on defense (along with Bynum, when he played)

Odom in particular (of the two) in his impact profile looks like a pretty significant defender.

[tsherkin]

Gasol and Odom were never great defensively

That isn't really accurate, though. They (and Ariza/Artest) were the driving force behind LA being 5th, 6th and 4th on defense (along with Bynum, when he played)

Odom in particular (of the two) in his impact profile looks like a pretty significant defender.

Matches my memory. Long, mobile defender with size who could switch out from 4s to 3s, pretty good footwork, etc, etc. Like, not a DPOY or anything, but a good and versatile defender who contributed positively to the team.

[rrravenred]

I'll just say that:
a. Kobe outside of LA and on a bad team wouldn't be getting the same amount of all nba honors/top 5 mvp finishes so those couldn't really be used to prop him up the same way they are now.
b. That without any rings he wouldn't get any top 20 talk. I think it would be mostly split between top 30 and top 40. He'd be seen as much closer to AI than to MJ.
c. Without Phil his personality would be harder to manage and seen as more of a weakness.
d. I think 1 ring would get him into most people's top 25. Some people's top 20.

There is a Laker premium on ATG discussions to be sure, but there's also the possibility that in a smaller market and without such stellar early-career success (playing alongside Diesel will do that), Kobe might have developed quite differently as a player, and as a person. It's quite possible that being thrown the keys to a team earlier in his career might also have changed his perspective on what his optimum contribution to success looked like.

Having said that, he did enter the league at the apogee of hero-ball before (arguably) the data revolution gave stats the edge over highlights, so the negative tendencies to his basketball personality might have developed anyway. And that may have just given him a KD-ish career where he was needle-moving offensive marvel without a sustained period of high-level team success.

[ShotCreator]

Not honestly sure what it means to be top 15 but that sounds pretty competitive once you count all the dominant big men alone.

Most of his career doesn’t give him a case over practically any ATG 6’9” and above guys. His prime overlapped with a significant portion of ATG bigger guys(LeBron, KG, Shaq, Duncan), and he was blown away every time those guys peaked or played up to their natural potential in each portion of his career.


If you really want to be objective about where Kobe stands on ability, you can really just compare him to guys he automatically skips in comparisons in the first place.

Simple test: What would you be measuring to put Kobe above Chris Paul in any year from 2008 to 2011? If you look at their performances against the field of the NBA in both RS and PS, and how they impacted games, I don't really see the measurement.


You can do the same with Nash from 05-07. Years where Kobe obviously sold out on defense to get his highest volume offensive numbers ever.

https://www.espn.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/3183/tex-winter-compares-kobe-bryant-and-michael-jordan

Kobe defense was at a level where it's essentially an offense only competition versus....Steve Nash of all players. Does he really truly impact games more than Nash while completely quitting on defense? Does he top him even with his best version of defense?


It just doesn't add up to this rare prime past the level of a regular, mostly one-way guard in any era for me. Westbrook, Harden, Luka, Nash....Kobe..I don't see the problem with him being in this category overall.

[LukaTheGOAT]

Not honestly sure what it means to be top 15 but that sounds pretty competitive once you count all the dominant big men alone.

Most of his career doesn’t give him a case over practically any ATG 6’9” and above guys. His prime overlapped with a significant portion of ATG bigger guys(LeBron, KG, Shaq, Duncan), and he was blown away every time those guys peaked or played up to their natural potential in each portion of his career.


If you really want to be objective about where Kobe stands on ability, you can really just compare him to guys he automatically skips in comparisons in the first place.

Simple test: What would you be measuring to put Kobe above Chris Paul in any year from 2008 to 2011? If you look at their performances against the field of the NBA in both RS and PS, and how they impacted games, I don't really see the measurement.


You can do the same with Nash from 05-07. Years where Kobe obviously sold out on defense to get his highest volume offensive numbers ever.

https://www.espn.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/3183/tex-winter-compares-kobe-bryant-and-michael-jordan

Kobe defense was at a level where it's essentially an offense only competition versus....Steve Nash of all players. Does he really truly impact games more than Nash while completely quitting on defense? Does he top him even with his best version of defense?


It just doesn't add up to this rare prime past the level of a regular, mostly one-way guard in any era for me. Westbrook, Harden, Luka, Nash....Kobe..I don't see the problem with him being in this category overall.

Regarding the CP3 question, many would likely side with Kobe for the 2009 and 2010 seasons due to a strong emphasis on playoff performance. In 2009, CP3 had the worst playoff performance of his prime, so if we consider that alone, it pales in comparison to Kobe's output. In 2010, CP3 didn't make the playoffs, which many see as a significant drawback, especially since Kobe won yet another title as the team's alpha. Not saying if this is the proper way to approach things, but I do think this would be common reasoning on the board.

When evaluating Kobe's defense from 2005-2007, it's important to consider that these years might not accurately represent how he would perform in an average team setting. His defense notably improved in 2008 and his work in 09/10 are probably superior as well. While it's possible Kobe was focused on scoring during those years, his defensive capabilities before and after this period suggest he could integrate into team defensive schemes more effectively than he demonstrated at the time.

From 2000-2002, Kobe proved he could be a defensive asset while complementing the greatest interior force ever, serving as the key perimeter playmaker for an all-time great dynasty without dominating the ball. As the clear number one option later on, he fit well into the triangle offense, and his defensive metrics improved when the Lakers were contenders.

There is reason to believe that Kobe's peak defensive performance could surpass what Nash achieved during the same period. Kobe has better comparable plus-minus numbers for his prime and peak compared to Nash, and he accomplished this on stronger overall teams. This suggests that Kobe's success was not merely due to weaker teammates but because he could genuinely integrate into and elevate team concepts.

[McBubbles]

Russell
Wilt
West
Robertson
Kareem
Bird
Magic
Jordan
Shaq
Hakeem
Garnett
Duncan
Dirk
Lebron
Steph

I think those are all the people one reasonably COULD put above him. I personally have him 11th but I think the absolute lowest he could be is 16th.

I don't think Baylor, Moses Malone, Dr J, Karl Malone, Stockton, Wade, CP3, Nash, Kidd, Westbrook, Harden, KD or Kawhi have much of a case over him.

I think Jokic, Giannis and Luca will have eclipsed him by the end of the decade though.

[migya]

Russell
Wilt
West
Robertson
Kareem
Bird
Magic
Jordan
Shaq
Hakeem
Garnett
Duncan
Dirk
Lebron
Steph

I think those are all the people one reasonably COULD put above him. I personally have him 11th but I think the absolute lowest he could be is 16th.

I don't think Baylor, Moses Malone, Dr J, Karl Malone, Stockton, Wade, CP3, Nash, Kidd, Westbrook, Harden, KD or Kawhi have much of a case over him.

I think Jokic, Giannis and Luca will have eclipsed him by the end of the decade though.

Don't see Curry having a case, he'll need another three years at his current level, he just hasn't played enough. KMalone is slightly better than Kobe, particularly given defense and rebounding factoring. Maybe a few of the others you mentioned are ahead of him as well. Though he played considerably less, David Robinson's impact on both ends might put him ahead as well. Only Chamberlain and Kareem had such two way impact.

[McBubbles]

Russell
Wilt
West
Robertson
Kareem
Bird
Magic
Jordan
Shaq
Hakeem
Garnett
Duncan
Dirk
Lebron
Steph

I think those are all the people one reasonably COULD put above him. I personally have him 11th but I think the absolute lowest he could be is 16th.

I don't think Baylor, Moses Malone, Dr J, Karl Malone, Stockton, Wade, CP3, Nash, Kidd, Westbrook, Harden, KD or Kawhi have much of a case over him.

I think Jokic, Giannis and Luca will have eclipsed him by the end of the decade though.

Don't see Curry having a case, he'll need another three years at his current level, he just hasn't played enough. KMalone is slightly better than Kobe, particularly given defense and rebounding factoring. Maybe a few of the others you mentioned are ahead of him as well. Though he played considerably less, David Robinson's impact on both ends might put him ahead as well. Only Chamberlain and Kareem had such two way impact.

If we're not doing career and just doing peaks then Kobe very well might get squeezed out of the top 20, with people like Robinson, Walton, Moses etc leap frogging him.

[migya]

Russell
Wilt
West
Robertson
Kareem
Bird
Magic
Jordan
Shaq
Hakeem
Garnett
Duncan
Dirk
Lebron
Steph

I think those are all the people one reasonably COULD put above him. I personally have him 11th but I think the absolute lowest he could be is 16th.

I don't think Baylor, Moses Malone, Dr J, Karl Malone, Stockton, Wade, CP3, Nash, Kidd, Westbrook, Harden, KD or Kawhi have much of a case over him.

I think Jokic, Giannis and Luca will have eclipsed him by the end of the decade though.

Don't see Curry having a case, he'll need another three years at his current level, he just hasn't played enough. KMalone is slightly better than Kobe, particularly given defense and rebounding factoring. Maybe a few of the others you mentioned are ahead of him as well. Though he played considerably less, David Robinson's impact on both ends might put him ahead as well. Only Chamberlain and Kareem had such two way impact.

If we're not doing career and just doing peaks then Kobe very well might get squeezed out of the top 20, with people like Robinson, Walton, Moses etc leap frogging him.

This is career......