Where does Kobe rank All-Time with another Repeat?

[NYK 455]

How can anyone in their right mind rank Kobe in front of Duncan? Kobe led his team to one ring, Duncan led his team to FOUR. Tim had the higher peak and was a superstar on both ends of the floor. How is Kobe ahead of Tim Duncan?

[-Illmatic-]

brother watch what youre saying cause you making a non sense.

I loled

[kasino]

I am not sure how Kobe winning a title in his 4th year mean anything. He was definitely not a HOF level player back then, and since no one considers Gasol as an all-time player by winning a title last year, then it only makes sense that we don't do it for Kobe in 2000.

First, 4th year may not matter to you but its a great comparison made to say a prime Pau Gasol is the equal to Kobe in his 4th year far from his prime. I didn't say he was at an GOAT level at that point but clearly starting down that road.

Unlike the Magic/Kareem pairing Shaq was the #1 player on those three championship teams. There is no argument. He's statistically superior, and anyone who have watched the 3 peat Lakers saw the offense was centered on Shaq, not Kobe. What really hurts Kobe's case for his credit of the 3 peat is that Shaq was just absolutely unstoppable. Teams always double team him even before he makes a move, and occasionally they have to send a triple team to slow him down. You see how Shaq basically scored on anyone in the Celtics series when he's only single covered? Think of that Shaq who becomes twice as quick and can take more pounding in the post, and that's prime Shaq in a nutshell. When you have a 300 pound monstrosity in the paint, it would be much harder to devise a gameplan for a dynamic wing who can drop 30 every night. Teams frequently had to put their bigs in foul trouble because Shaq would have scored anytime he wants to make a shot. With such a handicap Kobe was able to play the way we all love and hate, and even when Kobe isn't doing well Shaq is always there to clean things up.

Showtime was one of the best balanced teams the league ever seen. the 3peat was just Shaq and Kobe. I could give list of Kobe games showing how wrong you are but wht bother they have been posted b4 and your weak aeguements stay the same.

Besides, Kareem was known as a second fiddle at the twilight of his career, so no one is putting him up high because they think he won six titles as the main go to guy, he wasn't. He is GOAT because of his excellence for nearly two decades. That's true longevity right there. Kobe has only been at it for ten years as one of the league's top players and he's already showing signs of decline, if he falls off either next year or right after that then we can put to rest that Kobe had a longer peak than either Duncan or Shaq.

Wrong, Kareem was still the Captain during Showtime. He may have regressed but still a dominate player nothing compared to the Shaq of today. He still pretty much was a 20/10 center up into 85.

But clearly you have a agenda saying Kobe is going to fall off next year although he looks on his way to the Finals for the 3rd straight year. If some of you guys actually looked at his career you would see how great it has been instead of already having your mind made up saying he never will be top 5 etc.

If you want to argue with some Kobe fanatics then please do but if your going to deny my arguements back it up with more than just opionions about a player you clearly don't like.

If no replies I'm done with this thread. I'm not a crazy fan who just want to put him at the #1 spot but a fan who sees him on the level with Duncan/Shaq and I have proved my case with no room to doubt it.

[An Unbiased Fan]

How can anyone in their right mind rank Kobe in front of Duncan? Kobe led his team to one ring, Duncan led his team to FOUR. Tim had the higher peak and was a superstar on both ends of the floor. How is Kobe ahead of Tim Duncan?

Kobe was a co-leader with Shaq on that 3-peat team. It was 2 Top 5 players, surounded by roleplayers. If Kobe then proceeds to go back to back(twice), which Duncan was prevented from doing in 04' & 08' by LA, then he is ahead of Duncan.

I would rank Kobe's peak higher than Duncan's, and point out that Kobe too was a superstar on both ends of the floor.

TD = 9 time All-NBA/8 time All-D
Kobe = 8 time All-NBA/8 time All-D

Both are frankly underrated, IMO. I have both ahead of Bird.

[MasterRyu]

Ok why is David Robinson showing up in these top ten lists. Are you guys honestly saying 73 > 81? Lol , check your math.

[kobethegoat]

lol at Shaq being unstoppable, even a skinny white teenager who couldnt even stop Rick Brunson can stop Shaq.

All you had to do was foul him and he becomes a liability on the floor.

[NYK 455]

How can anyone in their right mind rank Kobe in front of Duncan? Kobe led his team to one ring, Duncan led his team to FOUR. Tim had the higher peak and was a superstar on both ends of the floor. How is Kobe ahead of Tim Duncan?

Kobe was a co-leader with Shaq on that 3-peat team. It was 2 Top 5 players, surounded by roleplayers. If Kobe then proceeds to go back to back(twice), which Duncan was prevented from doing in 04' & 08' by LA, then he is ahead of Duncan.

I would rank Kobe's peak higher than Duncan's, and point out that Kobe too was a superstar on both ends of the floor.

TD = 9 time All-NBA/8 time All-D
Kobe = 8 time All-NBA/8 time All-D

Both are frankly underrated, IMO. I have both ahead of Bird.

Kobe was not Shaqs equal. And you're throwing All NBA Defense selections like they mean something. Do you honestly believe Kobe was an equal defender to Duncan? lol. Kobe's peak doesn't touch Duncan's and lmao at Kobe being a superstar on the defensive end.

[kobethegoat]

lol and Shaq and Duncan, and a lmao at David Robinson being better than Kobe.

Who the hell pays money to watch Shaq and Duncan play basketball. Everybody knows basketball is a big mans game, and the NBA is a big mans league, but who the hell wants to watch these big stiffs making layups and hooks from 2 foot out.

Theres a reason why And1 streetball got popular during the dark ages aka the Shaq era(after Jordan, before Kobe) , its because the product oncourt was ****.

Kobe Bryant has more skill in his little toe than Shaq in his entire body. If I wanted to watch sweaty men using brute force to win Id be watching weightliting and not the NBA.

[Wile E. Coyote]

You do understand that there are 4 quarters in a game correct? If a team only tries to foul Shaq in the 4th quarter they might as well not bother when Shaq already demolished them in the first three quarters. Sure, let Shaq get his 40, THEN we foul him in the 4th as a futile attempt at getting him out of the game when we're already down 20. You are naive or ignorant to believe you can stop Shaq by fouling him. IIRC Shaq's 4th quarter FT during his prime was around 66%. Not very good, but good enough that he's not a liability.

Yeah, there are four quarters in a game. What was his FT% in the other three?

-Kareem was a better player than Kobe when he won his first two titles in LA.
-Magic wasn't as good as 3 peat Shaq during that same period.

But Kareem gets credit for the 87-88 titles when he was scoring 15-20 ppg, and Kobe gets no credit when he's scoring 21-30 ppg? That's BS.

If you can say Pippen's 6 rings counts less than Kobe's 4, then I say 3 of Kareem's rings means much more than Kobe's.

Kareem was a better player than Kobe. What I am pointing out is the hypocrisy present in my previous point.

[Gongxi]

No, the hypocrisy is as follows:

A. You want to count rings

which leads to

B. People citing Pippen

which leads to

C. You saying you have to look at the context of the titles

which leads to

D. People saying "YES! That's what we're talking about!"

which leads to

E. You missing the point

[NYK 455]

No, the hypocrisy is as follows:

A. You want to count rings

which leads to

B. People citing Pippen

which leads to

C. You saying you have to look at the context of the titles

which leads to

D. People saying "YES! That's what we're talking about!"

which leads to

E. You missing the point

'

Pretty much.

[bl2k]

No, the hypocrisy is as follows:

A. You want to count rings

which leads to

B. People citing Pippen

which leads to

C. You saying you have to look at the context of the titles

which leads to

D. People saying "YES! That's what we're talking about!"

which leads to

E. You missing the point

'

Pretty much.

Shaq Duncan and Kobe are all comparable superstars, Pippen was never on either of the three guys levels. So it's dumb to compare Kobe to Pippen when Kobe is clearly in a different tier than Pippen. Although it's not as drastic it's like when people use the Horry has 7 rings argument. it's stupid

[NYK 455]

No, the hypocrisy is as follows:

A. You want to count rings

which leads to

B. People citing Pippen

which leads to

C. You saying you have to look at the context of the titles

which leads to

D. People saying "YES! That's what we're talking about!"

which leads to

E. You missing the point

'

Pretty much.

Shaq Duncan and Kobe are all comparable superstars, Pippen was never on either of the three guys levels. So it's dumb to compare Kobe to Pippen when Kobe is clearly in a different tier than Pippen. Although it's not as drastic it's like when people use the Horry has 7 rings argument. it's stupid

And that's where you're wrong.

[pancakes3]

context?

pippen had as much to do with MJ's rings as manu did with Duncan's.

Kobe's rings with Shaq were as close to a 50-50 effort as a superstar duo could get (with the edge to shaq).

compromise? give kobe credit for 1.5 rings with shaq and a full ring with gasol. that's 2.5 career rings. another one this season still leaves him half a (earned) ring short of Duncan's 4.

[An Unbiased Fan]

No, the hypocrisy is as follows:

A. You want to count rings

which leads to

B. People citing Pippen

which leads to

C. You saying you have to look at the context of the titles

which leads to

D. People saying "YES! That's what we're talking about!"

which leads to

E. You missing the point

-The point is that Kobe was Top NBA player when he won all his rings, Pippen wasn't
-Kobe is an 8-time All-NBA 1st teamer, Pippen isn't
-Kobe was playing All-D defense AND scoring around 28-30 most of the time, Pippen wasn't
-Kobe was the goto guy for his title teams, Pippen wasn't

The comparison of MJ/Pippen to Shaq/Kobe is bad and holds no merit. Shaq & Kobe were both Top 5 players in all of the league when they 3-peated. If MJ/Magic/Bird played next to Shaq, the offensive focus would have still been Shaq, and they still would have deserved credit for those titles as Top 5 players too.

[NYK 455]

An ever flexible criteria, just to justify ranking Kobe ahead of Duncan and Shaq.

[An Unbiased Fan]

An ever flexible criteria, just to justify ranking Kobe ahead of Duncan and Shaq.

What is your criteria?

[bl2k]

NYK 455 what makes Duncan and Shaq so high above Kobe that he's not even worthy of a comparison lmao. It's clear in every thread you post in your goal is to discredit Kobe whenever you get the chance

[kobethegoat]

I think if Kobe wins this year then he surpasses Duncan and Shaq on the "greatness" scale

As for whos the better player, Duncan and Shaq really arent even in the same discussion with Kobe.

[bl2k]

haters are gonna use kobethegoat as an excuse to flat out hate on Laker fans,stop posting dude