RealGM Top 100 List #13

[ThaRegul8r]

Top 15? That's a little hyperbolic. I see him getting voted in at 10 or 11.

He's going to lose every run-off, book it. I'm calling Oscar, then Karl, and possibly Dr J or even The Logo to make it in before he does.

This prediction was based purely on emotion, seeing how Kobe won the run-off against (Karl) Malone, which was the very next thread after this was posted.

[Doctor MJ]

Congrats to Kobe!

He's not my choice, but he's certainly a great player who one can reasonably see being this high or higher.

Hoping that with KG & Kobe inducted, it will be a little less tense for a while.

[RSCD3_]

I'm voting Kobe Bryant

I thought his overall impact was pretty close to Oscar and he had slightly better longevity.

He has one of the greatest offensive skill sets. He has excelled as a first and second option. He is an underrated playmaker when he is focused. His defense was elite or near elite for his position from 99-04 and 08-10. That's near 9 seasons of above average defense. He is capable of leading good offenses with Below average support and capable of supplementing good defenses when he has a nice supporting cast on offense.

The runoff is Kobe v. Karl Malone, not Kobe v. Oscar . . . however even without your vote, Kobe wins this

18 Kobe Bryant (GC Pantalones, ShaqAttack3234, ardee, batmana, JordansBulls, Basketballefan, DQuinn1575, john248, lukekarts, ronnymac2, 90sAllDecade, MacGill, SactoKingsFan, rich316, Quotatious, Chuck Texas, Moonbeam)

7 Karl Malone (Baller2014, therealbig3, trex_8063, magicmerl, FJS, Danny Noonan1221, Gregoire)

IK I was just prefacing that I voted for Kobe over Oscar in my other vote





Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Sports Realist]

Dr J v.s Karl Malone

Tentative Vote- Karl Malone
I may change this later, I almost typed Dr J here, but couldn't quite do it. For the moment I think I'll go with the Mailman.

To me this comes down to Karl Malone and Dr J. I can still be swung either way of which one to choose, but for my money they are the two best players left.

Karl Malone v.s Kobe

Spoiler:

Karl Malone has been a strange exclusion from the discussion to date. Kobe just got 8 primary votes in the #11 thread and Karl got 0, yet Karl Malone is a comparably good offensive player (especially factoring in efficiency), a vastly more impactful defensive player, has much more longevity, has comparable or better accolades (if you're into that), and doesn't have Kobe's massive negatives which poison his on court impact to some degree. I can understand the argument for Kobe over Oscar or Dr J (I don't agree with it at all, but I can understand it), but what's the argument for Kobe over Karl Malone? There doesn't seem to be one except ring counting, which is silly. The more I think about it, the more I favour voting for Karl Malone. He's being massively slept on here.

Meanwhile I've been asking Kobe's supporters for 7 threads now to respond to his negative impact, and how they're accounting for it, and I've basically received no reply (except ones that indicate they are ignoring it). I think it's a serious issue, and should be responded to (it's covered in detail later in this post).

I had a lot of discussion about Karl Malone v.s Kobe last thread, and there seemed a clear consensus Karl Malone had an advantage in the following areas:
- Regular season offensive impact. Sure, Kobe is a better ballhandler than Karl Malone. So is Dominique Wilkins or Jason Kidd, but that doesn’t make them better offensive players. Karl Malone’s awesome RS offensive performances just have to be ahead of Kobe. Offensive impact is not about balancing different artificial skill sets like shooting v.s dribbling, it’s about impact on that end of the court. Shaq was a worse dribbling and passer than Kobe, but he was clearly a more impactful offensive player.
- Playoff and regular season defensive impact (by a large margin IMO)
- Longevity
- No negative issues hurting on court play like Kobe (see below in the Dr J section)
- Comparable or better accolades (assuming that matters)
So the only real area of contention left is playoff offensive output. I think in general it’s fair to argue Kobe gets a slight edge on that, but even this advantage is highly questionable. I remember being told Karl Malone’s 1988 playoff run, where he almost took out the showtime Lakers, and put up 30-12, was “inefficient”. I have no idea how that is so, when he shot 482. FG% and 537TS%. Kobe only had one playoffs ever with a FG% above 482, and his career playoff TS% is 541. Outside of his extra good 06-10 playoff stretch Kobe only had 1 season in the playoffs with a TS% above 537. It was low by the insanely high standards of regular season Malone, but it was still efficiency Kobe would be proud to call his own.

But take a step back. Let's look at Kobe’s very best playoff stretch, a 5 year run from 06-10 after the rules changed in his favour (and after he started to take a lot of plays on D off, so he could expend more energy on O), that saw him post a stat line of 29.8 PPG/5.7 RPG/5.4 APG 57%TS. That doesn’t look better overall compared to Karl Malone’s physical, statistical and actual peak, a 6 year stretch from the 88 playoffs through to 93, where he’s putting up 28.5ppg/11.9rpg/2.3 on 56TS%, all while playing brutal man and post D. I don’t really see Kobe’s advantage here. But let’s say it was a peak to peak comparison. Kobe’s peak playoff year in 2001 looks worse than Karl Malone’s best playoff series in 1992. Kobe put up 29-7-6 on 55TS%, some of which was against porous D, and with Shaq there to take defensive attention away from him (but feel free to ignore the last 2 things if you don’t agree). In 1992 Karl Malone had 29-11-3 on 62TS% Karl played 16 games that playoffs too, so you can't claim small sample size, and of course Karl's D was clearly much more impactful, even against 2001 Kobe (who did actually play good perimeter D).

How good was Karl Malone’s D? Well, Karl Malone was not an inside anchor on D, he couldn't impact a game the way Duncan could, but he was a monster defender through his career. He played great man D, and was one of the dirtiest thug enforcers you'll ever see. His favourite move was to swing his elbows back and forth every time he got a rebound, creating the impression this was just an "instinctive, habit driven move" when he got a board (while often catching players in the face with an elbow). I won't hold it against him (except morally), because he was sly enough to get away with it time and again. You had to be very worried going up against him in the post. He was also a fitness freak, in ridiculous shape, which gave him a tonne of muscle to throw around at other players. Malone caused major injuries with his tough (sneaky) play, even ending the career of some guy in college. He impact on the defensive end is pretty freaking huge.

Check out this video of his amazing post D:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_ezVqa2Z8o[/youtube]

Karl Malone and his elbows deserve a whole other category. Players had to be really careful about going inside to score against Malone, he was an extremely sneaky cheap shot artist. Some highlights here:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2KHn1un40g[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgM0Xm4E9UI[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bM-Y4UoiAY[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0nIHCR--Bg[/youtube]

I'll outline again my thoughts on Dr J v.s Kobe:

I was thinking about these two RE: the top 100 project:

The case for Dr J

Spoiler:

It’s odd that there has not been more traction for Dr J to this point. He has probably the highest peak of any remaining player, tonnes of longevity, great intangibles and could play both ends of the floor. The only real argument against him is that the ABA doesn’t count, and that’s an absurd argument which I’ll cover.

To begin with, let’s look at a post from Truelafan I found while searching realgm on this very subject:

Julius Erving has a higher peak. Kobe Bryant is a great player. He had had some amazing years. He has never had a year like Julius Erving had in 1976, where Doc led his team in...well, everything. He averaged 29.3 ppg, 11.0 rpg, 5.0 apg, 2.5 steals and almost 2 blocks per game. The kicker is that he played [better in the postseason and led a pretty nondescript team to a title. In the finals, he had Bobby Jones defending him. Bobby Jones has a legitimate claim to being one of the 5 best defensive players of all time. He was at his peak when he went up against Julius Erving in 1976. Erving dismantled him. Erving's 1976 season is one of the all time dominant seasons in every way. Kobe has never had a year like that. He's had some that were close...but so has Erving. So you kind of have to go with Erving's peak.

How much “better” did Dr J play in the playoffs? The guy was putting up 35-13-5-2-2 on a FG% of 53.3%. Ridiculous.
Dr MJ made this post on the #7 thread RE: Dr J:

It was me talking about Erving, and I'll confirm: There's no good reason at all to rate the NBA as clearly ahead of the ABA right before the merger. 5 years earlier sure, but the reason the merger happen had everything to do with the fact that the ABA kept gaining and gaining. By the end the ABA was winning more of the cross-league games than the NBA, and as I mentioned even the NBA's battlecry of "we played both sides of the ball" looks silly when you see how the ABA teams did when they came over and played with NBA rules.

Re: Declining numbers when he switched over. There were injuries yes, and there was a general decline that seems to me to come from a player whose game peaked more closely with his athleticism than your average all-timer - which says something about how special his athleticism was, and also says something about his BBIQ being good but not genius

The big thing though is simply that he was put onto another team with the worst fit imaginable. Philly's star George McGinnis was the knock off version of Erving: Both guys did it all, and both were used to their entire team being built around them in a unipolar manner. It was kind of like LeBron coming to Miami if you were to imagine Wade as a guy with no intention of sacrificing for build a great team around the new superior talent, except that the gap between LeBron & Wade as first option was smaller than the gap between Erving & McGinnis.

So Erving goes there and does what's asked of him, which is quite a bit less than he's used to because the team is essentially alternating between he and McGinnis. Over time, as the 76ers realized this just wasn't good enough, McGinnis got phased down and then traded, and so by the time we get to the '80s Erving's basically doing what you can expect him to do in that time period - which is very impressive, but it's not what he looked like in his peak.

If the New York Nets had been able to come over to the NBA intact, there's every reason to believe that the progression of Erving's stats from '76 to '80 would have been much more of a straight line, and he'd have been been doing his thing leading what would have been a strong contender without anyone seeing his teammates as particularly strong. Good chance that if this happened, Erving's something of a GOAT candidate.

Nor did Dr J fade off in the way some assert:

For those saying that Dr. J declined in the NBA.

Per 100 possession numbers:
74-76 (ABA): 32-13-6, 5.1 stl/blk
77-79 (NBA): 28-10-5, 4.0 stl/blk
80-82 (NBA): 34-10-6. 5.2 stl/blk

His rebounding numbers dropped off which can be explained by the ABA being a smaller league, but Dr. J's numbers from 80-82 are very comparable to his 74-76 ABA peak. Even his steals and blocks, an indicator of athleticism, went up in the NBA despite the fact that he was age 29-31 in that span compared to 23-25 from 74-76.

So Dr J actually has the highest peak left, and great longevity, the guy was still an MVP candidate into the early 80’s, and didn’t drop off the map right after that either. And of course he was putting up 32-12-4-3-2 on 50% shooting back in 1973 at age 22. Dr J was simply a more talented individual than Kobe- he was bigger, stronger, and more athletic. He had huge hands that let him palm the ball to do ridiculous stuff, which combined with his awesome body control made him near unstoppable going to the basket. He was a fantastic defender as well, with natural talents like size, strength and length that Kobe simply lacked (not to mention effort). Check out this video showcasing some of Erving’s ridiculous body control and athleticism, all of which he makes look effortless:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DebtVv87jDc[/youtube]

Does the ABA “Count”?

Spoiler:

In addition to the usual arguments about exhibitions games and players who switched in and out of the ABA, let's look at the most compelling argument; the 2 teams whose rosters changed the least from ABA to NBA. The first is one I know well, my own Spurs.

In the 3 years prior to the merger the Spurs had a win% of 53.6%, 60.7% and 59.5%. In the first 3 years in the NBA the Spurs had a win% of 53.7%, 63.4% and 58.5%. They actually did better in the NBA. Some people criticise their SRS dropping in 1977, but that's easily explainable; James Silas, an all-aba 1st teamer in 1976, suffered a catastrophic injury (from which he never fully recovered) and played only 22 games in 1977. He barely played in 78 either. Despite that, the Spurs SRS kicked it back up to ABA levels in 1978, and by 1979 (when Silas returned at a reduced capacity) they recorded a higher SRS than they had ever recorded in their history and tragically lost in the conference finals (if they'd won, they were the likely champs that year). So with a healthy Silas the Spurs wouldn't have just been breaking even with their ABA results leading into the merger, they'd have been significantly outperforming them.

Then look at the Nuggets. Despite losing some players they were still an awesome NBA team. Not quite as good as they'd been in the ABA, that was a combination of a number of factors (and not every team is going to transition as smoothly as the Spurs), but they were still an awesome team. Just like the Spurs, critics mention that the Nuggets SRS dropped in 1977, and it did drop marginally, but what they don't seem to know is that the Nuggets actually had the 2nd highest SRS in a 22 team NBA in 1977. The team with the best SRS? The one who beat them, and who won the championship that year. Lots of ABA players showed much the same thing on an individual level. Sure, Dr J's stats went down on arriving to the NBA, but that was a combination of both his injuries and the team he was on. There were three 30 pt scorers and one 20 point scorer. That wasn't going to work, so the coach said they'd all have to take less shots to make it work, and it almost did, the 76ers were consistently ripping it up despite the presence of way too many gunners, on their talent alone.

In some ways the ABA was a tougher league. There were plenty of weak teams in the NBA by 1976, but in the ABA in 1976 there was exactly one weak team (the Squires). The other 5/6ths of the time you played either one of 3 teams who’d have been NBA contenders, or 2 other teams that would have made the NBA playoffs that year probably. The two titles Dr J carried his team to, especially in 1976, were won in an league that was as strong as the NBA.

The case against Kobe

Kobe’s impact is lower than guys currently being discussed

Spoiler:

Kobe was never the best player in the league in any year…and yet people here want to vote him in the top 15 of all-time. Just think about that for a sec…nor is that my opinion, that’s also the opinion of the RPOY project on realgm (with Laker fans making up one of the largest voter groups).

As I've been elaborating on throughout the top 100 project, the best way to tell how much a guy can impact a team is often to look at how he does with bad team mates, because it removes all the variables of how much star X really did. All the top 10-15 type guys we're talking about did that, heck even some non-top 15 type guys like Nash and Walton and Dwight have shown that sort of impact. Kobe never did that. He not only never did that, but he demonstrated pretty conclusively he couldn't do it. From 99-04 the Lakers record when Shaq was hurt, but Kobe played, was 23-26 (a 38 win pace). Shaq led the same support cast his fans will call "bad" to a 30-10 record over this period (good for a 61 win pace). In 05-07 without Shaq, Kobe's teams were never contenders, winning between 34 and 45 wins. In 05 Kobe's team wasn't that bad, he had an all-star quality player in Odom, a very good player in young Caron Butler, and several decent role players to round out the starting line-up (Mihm, who was a solid role playing big before his injuries, and Atkins, who was a starter on a 50 win team the following season). Nor can you blame the 05 season on Kobe's injuries (they were 28-38 in games Kobe played), or Odom's (because Odom was only rested once the Lakers knew the playoffs was out of sight; they had an unbelievably tough schedule leading into the playoffs, mostly against 50 win teams).

The 06 and 07 teams were worse, but were they really worse than the sorts of bad teams Dr J had in 1976, or Walton in 77, or Oscar’s Royals, or Rick Barry’s 1975 title team? I doubt it. Odom would easily have been the 2nd best player on most of those teams. In the 2008 season the record without Bynum or Pau was also a mediocre 9-7. Basically Kobe couldn't get anywhere with bad teams. You know who could? The guys he's being compared to. I won’t even get started on what advanced stats say about Kobe (especially in regards to his horribly overrated D). There are multiple years where the Lakers really underachieved if Kobe is the player he’s being made out to be; 03, 04, 05-07, 08, 11, and of course 2013, for which Kobe has to shoulder his share of the blame too.

People are trying to give props to Kobe for his volume scoring, but that makes little sense. Dantley was probably a better scorer, and nobody is seriously considering him for a long while. We should be less interested in volume, and more interested in impact.

So right off the bat Kobe’s at a disadvantage with most of the guys he’s being compared to. But it gets worse because of the next thing…

Kobe’s horrible intangibles- bad team mate, bad leader

Spoiler:

This post is from a recent thread:

It's basically because Kobe has a pretty horrible record as a team mate, perhaps one of the worst of all-time for any star, and in some ways it's worse than ever. Why? Because in the old days you could rely on Kobe to play like a star at least, but now with the injuries and his age? You're basically stuck in a soap opera about whose team it is, and how Kobe gets to close his career. It wasn't fun, just ask Dwight Howard. I suspect that's why we're seeing so much Kobe twitter activity all of a sudden, taking pot shots at people (like the ridiculous tweet where he claimed the Hornets snubbed him in the draft, when in fact it was the exact opposite way around). I won't focus on Kobe's decisions to force his way to the Lakers, but here are some tidbits from Kobe's career.

Getting into the NBA Kobe had grand dreams about how his career would pan out, and was not shy about telling his team mates how great he would become. This led to obvious tension in the team, most particularly with Shaq:
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2 ... biography/

Phil Jackson writes how West first alerted him to the issue when West called him into his office and confided that Kobe had come to talk to Jerry, to ask him for advice. What advice did Kobe want from one of the Laker greats?

To try and teach Kobe what it meant to be part of a team, Phil arranged an introduction between Kobe and his former student, Michael Jordan, who had to learn to sacrifice for the team. It didn't go the way Phil hoped:

Phil goes on to say how he admired Kobe, but that:
.
Later in Phil's first season he pulled the team together so they could watch some game tape. He pointed out that the triangle couldn't work with selfish play, and opened the floor to the team:

Things got so bad that Phil wrote:

Even after winning a ring, Kobe's attitude hadn't settled much, in fact Phil worried each year that it got worse:

To try and stop Shaq and Kobe feuding Phil encouraged them to become friends off the court, but:

Later that season, after Shaq made a (private) trade demand to Buss, Kobe responded by giving a (public) interview to Rich Bucher, where he ripped into Shaq for his free throw shooting, and remarked:

Things didn't get easier from there:

Later that season, while discussing the subject with reporter Rick Telander, Phil mentioned that he'd heard a rumour about how Kobe would sabotage his HS team in games early on, so he could help them make a dramatic comeback. When this was published Kobe's mature response was to have his lawyer threaten to sue Phil.

The Lakers won a 3-peat anyway, but it wasn't enough. Rather than win, Kobe was worried about how he was perceived during these wins. He was, in his own words, sick of being Robin.

This wasn't the last time Kobe would demand a trade in public. As soon as the going got tough in LA he tried to force his way to Chicago.

After another (private) team fight in the 2004 season Kobe responded by going public with Jim Gray, again ripping on Shaq, for being out of shape, and for his "childlike selfishness and jealousy". Charming.

For years Phil had tried to get through to Kobe, but despite 3 titles in 4 years, things just seemed to get worse. Phil wanted Kobe traded

A few days later Phil details how Kobe got him fired:
.
when asked by the media if Phil's departure affected his free agency Kobe told reporters "I don't care". This is while Phil was trying to coach the team to a championship. The 2004 defeat of course was largely Kobe's fault. Rather than pass to Shaq, who was playing outstandingly, Kobe gunned it and shot horribly. The team lost, but Kobe seemed to prefer losing "his way" than winning another title as Shaq's Robin. He wanted to be the finals MVP this time, and taking as many shots as he felt he needed to in order to do that. After the loss Rick Fox summed it up:


Jackson was fired right after, and Shaq was moved to placate Kobe, who signed immediately afterwards. Sure, Magic got his coach fired once too, but at least that turned out to be the right move. Kobe wasn't doing this for the right reasons, indeed he had to swallow his pride and agree for Phil to come back after things fell apart without him. Forcing the team to move Shaq in a rush, so he would agree to re-sign, almost certainly hurt the Lakers in their quest to get fair value back (and indeed, keeping Shaq would have been more sensible).

Kobe had games where he would refuse to shoot to make "a point", often hurting the team as the opposing team reacted accordingly.

Nor was this sort of thing confined to minor games. Who could forget game 7 v.s the Suns where Kobe responded to media criticism that he shot to much by refusing to shoot. Seriously?
http://www.travelgolf.com/blogs/chris.b ... out_the_mo

The problem with Kobe's attitude is it has a very real effect on the team's on the court performance.

And who could forget Kobe's horrible leadership in regards to Dwight Howard, who was reportedly hesitant to come to LA in the first place after Kobe's pitch to him was for him to come "be my Tyson Chandler". The two clearly had issues during the season, much of it revolving around Dwight feeling that Kobe was shooting too much. Kobe's pitch for Dwight to stay at his meeting with the Lakers was not much better. After promising to "teach Dwight how to win" Kobe was asked by Dwight:

Can anyone think of another top 15 player who other star players and coaches reacted thusly to? I sure can't, and it hurts him a lot.

I would love to know where all those quotes are from in the case against Kobe (horrible intangibles)... What is that? All taken from Phil's book?

I know Baller is banned... But anyone else know this?

[Laimbeer]

I don't think 13 is unreasonably low for Kobe. But it's the lower end of what's reasonable. I could see him at perhaps 6 or 7, depending on your criteria.

He's also a player who attracts proponents and opponents who are agenda driven.

[Clyde Frazier]

Dr J v.s Karl Malone

Tentative Vote- Karl Malone
I may change this later, I almost typed Dr J here, but couldn't quite do it. For the moment I think I'll go with the Mailman.

To me this comes down to Karl Malone and Dr J. I can still be swung either way of which one to choose, but for my money they are the two best players left.

Karl Malone v.s Kobe

Spoiler:

Karl Malone has been a strange exclusion from the discussion to date. Kobe just got 8 primary votes in the #11 thread and Karl got 0, yet Karl Malone is a comparably good offensive player (especially factoring in efficiency), a vastly more impactful defensive player, has much more longevity, has comparable or better accolades (if you're into that), and doesn't have Kobe's massive negatives which poison his on court impact to some degree. I can understand the argument for Kobe over Oscar or Dr J (I don't agree with it at all, but I can understand it), but what's the argument for Kobe over Karl Malone? There doesn't seem to be one except ring counting, which is silly. The more I think about it, the more I favour voting for Karl Malone. He's being massively slept on here.

Meanwhile I've been asking Kobe's supporters for 7 threads now to respond to his negative impact, and how they're accounting for it, and I've basically received no reply (except ones that indicate they are ignoring it). I think it's a serious issue, and should be responded to (it's covered in detail later in this post).

I had a lot of discussion about Karl Malone v.s Kobe last thread, and there seemed a clear consensus Karl Malone had an advantage in the following areas:
- Regular season offensive impact. Sure, Kobe is a better ballhandler than Karl Malone. So is Dominique Wilkins or Jason Kidd, but that doesn’t make them better offensive players. Karl Malone’s awesome RS offensive performances just have to be ahead of Kobe. Offensive impact is not about balancing different artificial skill sets like shooting v.s dribbling, it’s about impact on that end of the court. Shaq was a worse dribbling and passer than Kobe, but he was clearly a more impactful offensive player.
- Playoff and regular season defensive impact (by a large margin IMO)
- Longevity
- No negative issues hurting on court play like Kobe (see below in the Dr J section)
- Comparable or better accolades (assuming that matters)
So the only real area of contention left is playoff offensive output. I think in general it’s fair to argue Kobe gets a slight edge on that, but even this advantage is highly questionable. I remember being told Karl Malone’s 1988 playoff run, where he almost took out the showtime Lakers, and put up 30-12, was “inefficient”. I have no idea how that is so, when he shot 482. FG% and 537TS%. Kobe only had one playoffs ever with a FG% above 482, and his career playoff TS% is 541. Outside of his extra good 06-10 playoff stretch Kobe only had 1 season in the playoffs with a TS% above 537. It was low by the insanely high standards of regular season Malone, but it was still efficiency Kobe would be proud to call his own.

But take a step back. Let's look at Kobe’s very best playoff stretch, a 5 year run from 06-10 after the rules changed in his favour (and after he started to take a lot of plays on D off, so he could expend more energy on O), that saw him post a stat line of 29.8 PPG/5.7 RPG/5.4 APG 57%TS. That doesn’t look better overall compared to Karl Malone’s physical, statistical and actual peak, a 6 year stretch from the 88 playoffs through to 93, where he’s putting up 28.5ppg/11.9rpg/2.3 on 56TS%, all while playing brutal man and post D. I don’t really see Kobe’s advantage here. But let’s say it was a peak to peak comparison. Kobe’s peak playoff year in 2001 looks worse than Karl Malone’s best playoff series in 1992. Kobe put up 29-7-6 on 55TS%, some of which was against porous D, and with Shaq there to take defensive attention away from him (but feel free to ignore the last 2 things if you don’t agree). In 1992 Karl Malone had 29-11-3 on 62TS% Karl played 16 games that playoffs too, so you can't claim small sample size, and of course Karl's D was clearly much more impactful, even against 2001 Kobe (who did actually play good perimeter D).

How good was Karl Malone’s D? Well, Karl Malone was not an inside anchor on D, he couldn't impact a game the way Duncan could, but he was a monster defender through his career. He played great man D, and was one of the dirtiest thug enforcers you'll ever see. His favourite move was to swing his elbows back and forth every time he got a rebound, creating the impression this was just an "instinctive, habit driven move" when he got a board (while often catching players in the face with an elbow). I won't hold it against him (except morally), because he was sly enough to get away with it time and again. You had to be very worried going up against him in the post. He was also a fitness freak, in ridiculous shape, which gave him a tonne of muscle to throw around at other players. Malone caused major injuries with his tough (sneaky) play, even ending the career of some guy in college. He impact on the defensive end is pretty freaking huge.

Check out this video of his amazing post D:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_ezVqa2Z8o[/youtube]

Karl Malone and his elbows deserve a whole other category. Players had to be really careful about going inside to score against Malone, he was an extremely sneaky cheap shot artist. Some highlights here:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2KHn1un40g[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgM0Xm4E9UI[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bM-Y4UoiAY[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0nIHCR--Bg[/youtube]

I'll outline again my thoughts on Dr J v.s Kobe:

I was thinking about these two RE: the top 100 project:

The case for Dr J

Spoiler:

It’s odd that there has not been more traction for Dr J to this point. He has probably the highest peak of any remaining player, tonnes of longevity, great intangibles and could play both ends of the floor. The only real argument against him is that the ABA doesn’t count, and that’s an absurd argument which I’ll cover.

To begin with, let’s look at a post from Truelafan I found while searching realgm on this very subject:

How much “better” did Dr J play in the playoffs? The guy was putting up 35-13-5-2-2 on a FG% of 53.3%. Ridiculous.
Dr MJ made this post on the #7 thread RE: Dr J:

Nor did Dr J fade off in the way some assert:

So Dr J actually has the highest peak left, and great longevity, the guy was still an MVP candidate into the early 80’s, and didn’t drop off the map right after that either. And of course he was putting up 32-12-4-3-2 on 50% shooting back in 1973 at age 22. Dr J was simply a more talented individual than Kobe- he was bigger, stronger, and more athletic. He had huge hands that let him palm the ball to do ridiculous stuff, which combined with his awesome body control made him near unstoppable going to the basket. He was a fantastic defender as well, with natural talents like size, strength and length that Kobe simply lacked (not to mention effort). Check out this video showcasing some of Erving’s ridiculous body control and athleticism, all of which he makes look effortless:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DebtVv87jDc[/youtube]

Does the ABA “Count”?

Spoiler:

In addition to the usual arguments about exhibitions games and players who switched in and out of the ABA, let's look at the most compelling argument; the 2 teams whose rosters changed the least from ABA to NBA. The first is one I know well, my own Spurs.

In the 3 years prior to the merger the Spurs had a win% of 53.6%, 60.7% and 59.5%. In the first 3 years in the NBA the Spurs had a win% of 53.7%, 63.4% and 58.5%. They actually did better in the NBA. Some people criticise their SRS dropping in 1977, but that's easily explainable; James Silas, an all-aba 1st teamer in 1976, suffered a catastrophic injury (from which he never fully recovered) and played only 22 games in 1977. He barely played in 78 either. Despite that, the Spurs SRS kicked it back up to ABA levels in 1978, and by 1979 (when Silas returned at a reduced capacity) they recorded a higher SRS than they had ever recorded in their history and tragically lost in the conference finals (if they'd won, they were the likely champs that year). So with a healthy Silas the Spurs wouldn't have just been breaking even with their ABA results leading into the merger, they'd have been significantly outperforming them.

Then look at the Nuggets. Despite losing some players they were still an awesome NBA team. Not quite as good as they'd been in the ABA, that was a combination of a number of factors (and not every team is going to transition as smoothly as the Spurs), but they were still an awesome team. Just like the Spurs, critics mention that the Nuggets SRS dropped in 1977, and it did drop marginally, but what they don't seem to know is that the Nuggets actually had the 2nd highest SRS in a 22 team NBA in 1977. The team with the best SRS? The one who beat them, and who won the championship that year. Lots of ABA players showed much the same thing on an individual level. Sure, Dr J's stats went down on arriving to the NBA, but that was a combination of both his injuries and the team he was on. There were three 30 pt scorers and one 20 point scorer. That wasn't going to work, so the coach said they'd all have to take less shots to make it work, and it almost did, the 76ers were consistently ripping it up despite the presence of way too many gunners, on their talent alone.

In some ways the ABA was a tougher league. There were plenty of weak teams in the NBA by 1976, but in the ABA in 1976 there was exactly one weak team (the Squires). The other 5/6ths of the time you played either one of 3 teams who’d have been NBA contenders, or 2 other teams that would have made the NBA playoffs that year probably. The two titles Dr J carried his team to, especially in 1976, were won in an league that was as strong as the NBA.

The case against Kobe

Kobe’s impact is lower than guys currently being discussed

Spoiler:

Kobe was never the best player in the league in any year…and yet people here want to vote him in the top 15 of all-time. Just think about that for a sec…nor is that my opinion, that’s also the opinion of the RPOY project on realgm (with Laker fans making up one of the largest voter groups).

As I've been elaborating on throughout the top 100 project, the best way to tell how much a guy can impact a team is often to look at how he does with bad team mates, because it removes all the variables of how much star X really did. All the top 10-15 type guys we're talking about did that, heck even some non-top 15 type guys like Nash and Walton and Dwight have shown that sort of impact. Kobe never did that. He not only never did that, but he demonstrated pretty conclusively he couldn't do it. From 99-04 the Lakers record when Shaq was hurt, but Kobe played, was 23-26 (a 38 win pace). Shaq led the same support cast his fans will call "bad" to a 30-10 record over this period (good for a 61 win pace). In 05-07 without Shaq, Kobe's teams were never contenders, winning between 34 and 45 wins. In 05 Kobe's team wasn't that bad, he had an all-star quality player in Odom, a very good player in young Caron Butler, and several decent role players to round out the starting line-up (Mihm, who was a solid role playing big before his injuries, and Atkins, who was a starter on a 50 win team the following season). Nor can you blame the 05 season on Kobe's injuries (they were 28-38 in games Kobe played), or Odom's (because Odom was only rested once the Lakers knew the playoffs was out of sight; they had an unbelievably tough schedule leading into the playoffs, mostly against 50 win teams).

The 06 and 07 teams were worse, but were they really worse than the sorts of bad teams Dr J had in 1976, or Walton in 77, or Oscar’s Royals, or Rick Barry’s 1975 title team? I doubt it. Odom would easily have been the 2nd best player on most of those teams. In the 2008 season the record without Bynum or Pau was also a mediocre 9-7. Basically Kobe couldn't get anywhere with bad teams. You know who could? The guys he's being compared to. I won’t even get started on what advanced stats say about Kobe (especially in regards to his horribly overrated D). There are multiple years where the Lakers really underachieved if Kobe is the player he’s being made out to be; 03, 04, 05-07, 08, 11, and of course 2013, for which Kobe has to shoulder his share of the blame too.

People are trying to give props to Kobe for his volume scoring, but that makes little sense. Dantley was probably a better scorer, and nobody is seriously considering him for a long while. We should be less interested in volume, and more interested in impact.

So right off the bat Kobe’s at a disadvantage with most of the guys he’s being compared to. But it gets worse because of the next thing…

Kobe’s horrible intangibles- bad team mate, bad leader

Spoiler:

This post is from a recent thread:

I would love to know where all those quotes are from in the case against Kobe (horrible intangibles)... What is that? All taken from Phil's book?

I know Baller is banned... But anyone else know this?

I forgot how much that poster would post content without giving any credit to other posters or sources. Really disconcerting...