Can you name 15 players in NBA history better than Kobe?

[USA]

Jaypo, not getting into the Shaq/Kobe breakup in this thread but that wiki page doesn't list every quote and every feud. Also, wiki pages are made up by regular internet users. You can go and edit that page to add anything if you like, doesn't mean everything on it is the truth. They both said some pretty childish, ego driven stupid things about each other in local papers throughout there time here in LA. If there was only some way to pull up all of those local articles throughout their years together. Shaq was on Kobe's case since day one. I am sure that Shaq was joking a lot but to Kobe, he took certain things serious. They had opposite personalities and that was there root of their problems.

[semi-sentient]

Good post except for the bold. That is not a good way to determine importance considering the team was built for Shaq's strenghts and weaknesses not Kobe's.

Agreed. John Salley and Greg Foster were Shaq's replacements in 2000 and 2001 for crying out loud. No s**t they're going to struggle when they have those two as replacements for the guy the offense is built around.

[semi-sentient]

BTW, I don't know if I weighed in yet, but I think you can make an argument for the following:

1) Kareem
2) Jordan
3) Magic
4) Wilt
5) Russel (just for Sedale )
6) Duncan
7) Shaq
8) Bird
9) Hakeem
10) Jerry West
11) Julius Erving

Other than that, nope. Every single player in the above list had the ability to dominate in the playoffs and lead their team to a championship, and their level of play was excellent for an extended period of time on top of that. There are other players who had great years here and there, but they never put it together consistently and/or long enough. Sustained excellence is important when you're talking about the best of the best, as is the ability to regularly dominate playoff opponents. That said, I have Kobe at the 9 or 10 spot depending on how I feel. Him and Hakeem are pretty close in my book.

[Grime_Wizard]

am i the only one who thinks elgin baylor in his prime is better than Kobe

[J08]

Russel, bird, duncan, shaq, erving, and hakeem are not better thn kobe.
Dude kobe gets criticized for shooting a bad %, look at russells numbers he shoots 44% thats horrible for a centre. He won alot of rings but there was like 8 teams and his team was stacked.

Look at birds advanced stats and compare it to bryant. Birds advantage is only reb but kobe makes up for it with way better def and slightly better scoring.

Shaq had a better peak but not career.

Duncan only has mvps over bryant but bryant has more rings.

[Warspite]

BTW, I don't know if I weighed in yet, but I think you can make an argument for the following:

1) Kareem
2) Jordan
3) Magic
4) Wilt
5) Russel (just for Sedale )
6) Duncan
7) Shaq
8) Bird
9) Hakeem
10) Jerry West
11) Julius Erving

Other than that, nope. Every single player in the above list had the ability to dominate in the playoffs and lead their team to a championship, and their level of play was excellent for an extended period of time on top of that. There are other players who had great years here and there, but they never put it together consistently and/or long enough. Sustained excellence is important when you're talking about the best of the best, as is the ability to regularly dominate playoff opponents. That said, I have Kobe at the 9 or 10 spot depending on how I feel. Him and Hakeem are pretty close in my book.

Moses Malone?? Guy is a allstar 20-10 player 10 yrs removed from his 1st MVP. 3MVPs in 5 yrs (a top 5 prime). I think if you look at your criteria Moses Malone is very, very impressive.

[Optimism Prime]

Russel, bird, duncan, shaq, erving, and hakeem are not better thn kobe.
Dude kobe gets criticized for shooting a bad %, look at russells numbers he shoots 44% thats horrible for a centre. He won alot of rings but there was like 8 teams and his team was stacked.

Look at birds advanced stats and compare it to bryant. Birds advantage is only reb but kobe makes up for it with way better def and slightly better scoring.

Shaq had a better peak but not career.

Duncan only has mvps over bryant but bryant has more rings.

Horrible for a center in the modern era.

Year League FG% Rank
1956-57 NBA .427 (5)
1957-58 NBA .442 (3)
1958-59 NBA .457 (2)
1959-60 NBA .467 (4)

Four straight years in the top five? Not bad.

[karkinos]

3. There was definitive yr where Kobe was number 1...even if you think he was top 5 every yr from 01-10...There wasn't one yr where Kobe was UNANIMIOUSLY 1...2001-2004= Shaq was NUMBER 1....2003-2007 gets alittle more confusing...Duncan was dominating, winning titles....Nash won 2 MVP's...and you can say whatever but Nash deserved it and he was balling...Wade had one of the greatest performances in 2006...the emergence of King James...T-mac's ridiculous yr in 03....Iverson going strong...I mean I have no qualms giving you 2006 but it's very arguable...2008 and 2009...constant media debates between James and Bryant(Personally I would give my boy Wade the title but realistically speaking he JUST started getting media love as possible best player in the league so thats why I didn't mention him)............I mean where was he the DEFINITIVE DOMINATE NUMBER 1 player in the league

when kobe won his first 3 rings it was clear shaq was the most dominant player in the game, but kobe was still the gold standard as far as shooting guards. post 2004, i don't even see how anyone could compare to his 2005-2006 campaign. he had smush parker, kwame brown, luke walton, and devean george (http://www.lakersweb.net/rosters/lalakers_2005_2006.htm) and took those scrubs to the playoffs. it wasn't a question who was the best individual player on the planet that year.

[jaypo]

3. There was definitive yr where Kobe was number 1...even if you think he was top 5 every yr from 01-10...There wasn't one yr where Kobe was UNANIMIOUSLY 1...2001-2004= Shaq was NUMBER 1....2003-2007 gets alittle more confusing...Duncan was dominating, winning titles....Nash won 2 MVP's...and you can say whatever but Nash deserved it and he was balling...Wade had one of the greatest performances in 2006...the emergence of King James...T-mac's ridiculous yr in 03....Iverson going strong...I mean I have no qualms giving you 2006 but it's very arguable...2008 and 2009...constant media debates between James and Bryant(Personally I would give my boy Wade the title but realistically speaking he JUST started getting media love as possible best player in the league so thats why I didn't mention him)............I mean where was he the DEFINITIVE DOMINATE NUMBER 1 player in the league

when kobe won his first 3 rings it was clear shaq was the most dominant player in the game, but kobe was still the gold standard as far as shooting guards. post 2004, i don't even see how anyone could compare to his 2005-2006 campaign. he had smush parker, kwame brown, luke walton, and devean george (http://www.lakersweb.net/rosters/lalakers_2005_2006.htm) and took those scrubs to the playoffs. it wasn't a question who was the best individual player on the planet that year.

You know something- you're exactly right. And I cannot argue that Kobe has been the best INDIVIDUAL player on the planet roughly since 2001. However, my problem with Kobe's game is exactly that. His INDIVIDUAL game jeopardized his TEAM game. By his own admission, he grew tired of the triangle offense because it didn't allow him to showcase his talent- his words, not mine. The feud started because Shaq told Phil in a meeting that he thought Kobe was playing selfishly. But he gets blasted for it. No blasting Kobe because he was playing selfish ball, but blast Shaq because he said something about it.

No, I can't deny Kobe's talent. He has been the best TALENT in the game for a decade. My issue with him as a player is that he has constantly put his personal agenda ahead of the team concept, causing the breakup of the greatest duo in history. I would rather a consumate team player than an individually talented player that puts personal agendas ahead of the team.

[semi-sentient]

Moses Malone?? Guy is a allstar 20-10 player 10 yrs removed from his 1st MVP. 3MVPs in 5 yrs (a top 5 prime). I think if you look at your criteria Moses Malone is very, very impressive.

That's true. Moses had an impressive stretch from 1979-80 to 1982-83 (especially in 1982-83 where he was GREAT against Kareem in the Finals), but what I've learned from the RPOY project is that he had some serious flaws in his game and was considered very one-dimensional hence the reason his teams regularly underperformed with him as the center piece. Outside of those years, voters had a very hard time putting him in the top 5 (and those were the only years he cracked the top 3), and a lot of the complaints that I saw revolved around his offensive game (limited arsenal, poor passer, doesn't play well in a structured offense) and lack of defense for a big man. He was the guy that put up nice numbers on bad teams and didn't have that much of an impact. His strong point was on the offensive rebounding side of the house and ability to score inside off of put backs, but he wasn't any kind of force that regularly scored with great efficiency outside of a few years.

Anyway, if you look back through the RPOY threads, you'll see several years where Gervin is getting voted ahead of Moses, and Gervin was known as a pretty poor defender. That says something right there as Moses was a big man who was supposed to be anchoring a defense, and yet his teams always lacked interior defense.

This little blurb pretty much sums up the issues that people had with Malone even during his peak years:

I've gotta say that this year, as I noted in my original post, I have a really hard time putting Moses in the top 5. He was a below average defender that turned the ball over all the time. He was average, at best, at FG%—even though he had little range. (Malone shot about as well as Dan Issel...except Dan Isssel was putting up a bunch of 18-22 footers). The Rockets team was pretty good other than Malone, and they were a .500 team.

I understand the allure of statistics, but Moses Malone didn't help his team to win a large number of games. For me, that's a major factor in deciding the value of a player. You can have all sorts of great number of obvious skills...but if your team doesn't put Ws on the board, then something is wrong.

...

Moses got a significant amount of his points off his offensive rebounding and resulting shots and free throws. He wasn't a guy you could build an offense around. He had hands of stone. He was a poor passer. His range was not great, and was almost non-existant prior to about 1981. I don't know what percentage of his points came off of putbacks on offensive rebounds and fouls when he got the ball (often by rebound) near the basket, but it's got to be extraordinary.

In a sense, that's a good thing. Moses was a garbageman; he cleaned up after other people's mistakes. But that's why I drew a distinction between "offense" and "scoring." Some people, because of the way they get their points, are not conducive to working within an offensive scheme. Moses is one of them. I think his offensive and rebounding are tied together.

Before we began that project I considered Moses to have a case based on statistics/awards, but after learning more about his game and seeing past the numbers I have to say no, I don't consider him better. I know a lot of people really value peak play and in that regard a case can probably be made, but I consider it more impressive for a player to be top 5ish for 10+ years which is what you get with Kobe.

I also want to add that I generally put Dr J below Kobe before we did that project, but again after learning more I think you can make a solid case for him because he was a fantastic two-way player and a great leader.

[semi-sentient]

My issue with him as a player is that he has constantly put his personal agenda ahead of the team concept, causing the breakup of the greatest duo in history. I would rather a consumate team player than an individually talented player that puts personal agendas ahead of the team.

So was Kobe putting his agenda ahead of the team when he toned it down a notch in the Finals and allowed Shaq to exploit the mismatches? Outside of the 2003-04 Finals, you simply can't say that Kobe was playing outside of the team concept in a way that it hurt the team. Him wanting a bigger role did not hurt the Lakers until the feud had gotten to a point where it was irreparable (just after the 2002-03 season, which was largely due to Shaq's conditioning issues and the shots he publicly took at Kobe).

[jaypo]

Actually, I was alluding to occurrences like, for instance, the Rockets game where Kobe shot a huge amount of shots (and happened to shoot really well), but went into maverick mode and ignored the defense. There was a shot of Phil and Shaq on the sidelines, and there faces are priceless! And Kobe gets chewed out for not running the offense properly. I've read that it was after that game that Shaq got pissed and made comments about Kobe playing selfishly.

This is just 1 game that I can point to, but as a fan for the entire 8 years, I can tell you that there were many times that I yelled at the TV for him to pass the ball and quit trying to take over the game. I remember many instances during the halftime shows of Laker games and even during the games where the announcers would make comments such as "I don't understand why they don't just dump the ball to Shaq every trip down the court", mostly when Kobe would go 1 on 3. And the 04 Finals actually sealed the deal, IMO. The 02-03 season I blame entirely on Shaq and his decision to delay surgery. Even though he still was able to play himself into good enough shape, the fact that the Lakers did not retool enough to be able to compete in addition to Shaq's conditioning resulted in no 4 peat!

I'm not saying that he always played outside of the team concept, but when he publicly states that he doesn't like running the offense that the coach demands because it doesn't display his talents, or when he plays like he did in the 04 finals, or when he refuses to shoot during a game just to prove a point, that's what I base my statements on.

[semi-sentient]

That's always been a problem for Kobe. He's too good for his own good. Sometimes he gets hot and gets into his own little universe and just doesn't know when to cut back. To this day I find myself yelling at the TV on a regular basis. At times, I think it's fine, but given the circumstances with him and Shaq it obviously didn't go over well.

I realize that there are times where he went outside of the team concept, but it didn't really affect the Lakers until 2003-04 where he just played completely stupid. Other than that, I don't think he gets enough credit for toning down his game in the early years. He could have clearly been more dominant and/or taken on a much larger role, but he knew exactly when to let Shaq go to work and exploit the big mismatches.

Anyway, he's easily one of the most frustrating Lakers that I've had to endure, but he's also one of the best so I have to take the good with the bad. At the end of the day he's helped deliver 5 championships (in 7 appearances) so that does a lot for making me forget the negatives.

[coolnerd88]

when kobe won his first 3 rings it was clear shaq was the most dominant player in the game, but kobe was still the gold standard as far as shooting guards. post 2004, i don't even see how anyone could compare to his 2005-2006 campaign. he had smush parker, kwame brown, luke walton, and devean george (http://www.lakersweb.net/rosters/lalakers_2005_2006.htm) and took those scrubs to the playoffs. it wasn't a question who was the best individual player on the planet that year.

What? how can you just say he was the gold standard when you had Iverson..T-Mac and VC all balling? Heck Iverson had dibbs for 2nd best in the early 00's

I'll concede 2006 but it became VERY ARGUABLE after Wade had an all-time performance in the finals

2007 08 and 09 I disagree completely that Kobe was the CLEAR CUT BEST PLAYER

As for your point about Kobe taking a trash team to the playoffs so that makes him best player in the league.......why do I think is extremely possible that didn't give Wade his props when he carried scrubs to the playoffs these past few yrs

[jaypo]

You see, if more Laker fans such as yourself were taking part in these discussions, it would be easy! I can agree with that. I know that Phil made comments about Shaq toning down his personal game in the triangle, and indirectly putting up better numbers. And he commented how Kobe had the ability to do whatever was needed, whether it be tone it down or take over. Phil also applauded Kobe for being able to handle the season in 03-04 and being mentally strong enough to handle it.

I think the whole feud thing was (Please Use More Appropriate Word) on both sides. Shaq's ego wouldn't let it heal, and Kobe's realization that he COULD be the greatest but didn't want to wait wouldn't let it heal. If they both would have just realized that more good could have come from it if they BOTH put the TEAM first, they could have been the 2nd greatest NBA dynasty ever!

[Quincy]

Definitive best player in the league? Kinda hard when you have such competition that he has had this decade. But I honestly feel he was the best in 06, 07, 09, and 10. I'm not even going to take ijnto account his earlier years. He may not have the best statistics or win the MVP's but just look at the postseason. He gets it done where Lebron, Wade, and company don't. You can argue Kobe has a better supporting cast but LeBron got the past two regular season records. It's the postseason that matters. If you are going to discredit Kobe for his lack of sucess in various Finals games then you should hinder Bron the same.

Kobe is top ten. Bottom line. When I get back I'll name the players who are better.

[Father Time]

Definitive best player in the league? Kinda hard when you have such competition that he has had this decade. But I honestly feel he was the best in 06, 07, 09, and 10. I'm not even going to take ijnto account his earlier years. He may not have the best statistics or win the MVP's but just look at the postseason. He gets it done where Lebron, Wade, and company don't. You can argue Kobe has a better supporting cast but LeBron got the past two regular season records. It's the postseason that matters. If you are going to discredit Kobe for his lack of sucess in various Finals games then you should hinder Bron the same.

Kobe is top ten. Bottom line. When I get back I'll name the players who are better.

I agree. I feel like he was the best player in the league in 05-06 and 06-07 for sure, his teams just sucked. He was pretty close to the best player in 2008 as well.

It's funny, because I remember reading on this board that Kobe doesn't play above his regular season averages in the playoffs. That's not true at all. This year his PER jumped by a considerable margin this year, and his numbers generally improve in the post season.

[kabstah]

Definitive best player in the league? Kinda hard when you have such competition that he has had this decade. But I honestly feel he was the best in 06, 07, 09, and 10. I'm not even going to take ijnto account his earlier years. He may not have the best statistics or win the MVP's but just look at the postseason. He gets it done where Lebron, Wade, and company don't. You can argue Kobe has a better supporting cast but LeBron got the past two regular season records. It's the postseason that matters. If you are going to discredit Kobe for his lack of sucess in various Finals games then you should hinder Bron the same.

Kobe is top ten. Bottom line. When I get back I'll name the players who are better.

If you look at the post season, he's not the best in 06 or 07. If you look at statistics, he's not the best in 09 or 10. Which one is it? You can't have it both ways.

[wallflower]

Sure you can, when you've done it as long and as well as Kobe youre given the benefit of the doubt it's been given to all the greatest. That's what being a veteren is about.

[kabstah]

A stupid double standard like that shows a lack of critical thinking, regardless of whom it's applied to. What's the logical process that makes post season success a valid litmus test one season and not valid two years ago? There is none, unless it's a blatant attempt to prop up Kobe as the best player in the game. In any sort of critical analysis, you determine your criteria first and your conclusion later instead of first deciding that Kobe is the best player and then twisting the criteria to fit that conclusion.