RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #12 (Kobe Bryant)

[trex_8063]

2020 List
1. LeBron James
2. Michael Jordan
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
4. Bill Russell
5. Tim Duncan
6. Wilt Chamberlain
7. Magic Johnson
8. Shaquille O'Neal
9. Hakeem Olajuwon
10. Larry Bird
11. Kevin Garnett
12. ???

Target stop-time for this one will by around 4pm EST on Saturday.

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[quote=”sansterre”].[/quote]

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[Odinn21]

Directly copy/pasted from #11 thread since I did not have Garnett on my ballot.

12. Kobe Bryant
When the top 10 is over, my tier 1 peak list will be done. And there are players peaked higher than Bryant. The thing about him is though, his overall prime was really impressive and stacks up. When I follow my process and think of 10/12 best seasons between two players. even though Bryant wouldn't take the top spot against a few names, he has 7 incredibly solid seasons going for him. Not saying all 7 would make that top 10 lists but so strong.
Another important thing to look is his rise in the playoffs from 2008 to 2010. He went from 4.9 obpm to 6.7 obpm. That 6+ obpm range while making a jump from the regular season is a pretty select company.
Surely Bryant also had his low moments. His longevity was blocked.

13. Oscar Robertson
One of the greatest offensive players that ever graced the game and his defensive performance was not bad enough to hold him down against players like Moses, Erving, Erving and Garnett.
Based on so little knowledge compared to what we have for modern times, I'd go on a limb and say Robertson's performance in 1963 was the greatest individual performance against Bill Russell's Celtics. Better than Chamberlain's, West's and Baylor's. Surely, this is not a decider or a huge factor. Just wanted to mention and would like you to entertain this idea and hit me back with some feedback.

14. Moses Malone
I believe this will be my most controversial choice so far but I'm pretty confident in this pick.
His single season peak was tier 2 on overall for me. I'd put 1982 or 1983 Moses in the same tier as 2004 Garnett, even though I'd rate Garnett slightly higher. One of the things going for Moses though, his 3 season peak from 1980-81 to 1982-83 is definitely at the top level among the available names. He does not come short in peak, extended peak, prime and extended prime for me. His career resume is also massive.
He was one of the most skilled bigs on offense. His name rarely comes up among the best low post scorers but he literally had every move in his book and he was at least pretty good on some and great or best on most. Look at the players he thought; Hakeem Olajuwon and Charles Barkley. Also he was at least as good as old man Duncan from mid range.
The arguments against him usually go such as this;
- "He wouldn't be that good in the modern times which utilize PnR far more."
Portability is very important, yes. But, TBH, this is like saying Oscar Robertson did not shoot enough threes to me. Don't see the point of penalizing a player for a play style that was not there in his time.
Also, one of the things that gets easily overlooked while thinking about Moses' portability is that he's quite possibly the greatest foul drawing big. That would make wonders in any era. I don't have the exact numbers right now because BBRef made their play index service paid but I know that Moses Malone before fell out of his prime made young Hakeem Olajuwon fouled out in majority of their h2h games. I wrote the exact numbers in the past on the forum, if I find, I'll edit this part.
- "He was a negative impact on defense."
This is flat out wrong and it's not about some preference unlike the previous point. If Moses Malone was a negative impact on defense, then how did the Sixers improved on defense after losing their best defender in order to get Moses?
1982 Sixers; 7th in DRtg with -3.0 rDRtg
1983 Sixers; 5th in DRtg with -3.8 rDRtg
The thing about his defense was, he was inconsistent. He had bad defensive seasons and good defensive seasons, in the end both sides would cancel out each other and I'd put down Moses Malone as an average defender. But I never get the point of talking about him as if he was Nowitzki who got way more traction than him so far.
- "He was not an impact player."
This is also one of the wrong assumptions about him. I think I watched enough games of him to get the sense of a very positive impact player.
Also there was a Dipper 13 thread at the time, showing on/off Rtg numbers for the '80s Sixers. I'm looking for that, couldn't find it so far. If anyone has the link, it'd be appreciated.
Edit; Found it.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZxRM9p2dFil5w6s21VEB4HnQZJymEY8_2vej-jREuUo/edit#gid=459687126
Just look at the numbers he had in '83 and '85 in Philly. (I tend to consider 1984 of Moses as something like 2005 for Bryant, a down year but also an outlier.)

The only aspect I'd hold against him is his passing. He was not a black hole, he was a decent facilitator. Though his passing lacked in some sense and you wouldn't see him those cutting passes to a guard under the basket. That type of stuff was the only major gap in his game for me.
His skillset was great, his scoring volume was great, he had the proper impact on offense, he's among one of the greatest rebounders. We usually overlook rebounding, the neutral aspect of the game, in this offense and defense evaluations. His defensive inconsistencies and passing issues are there to be addressed surely but, his great qualities are enough for me to put him on 13th spot.

[eminence]

It feels to me like there a lot of guards worthy of comparison here - Kobe/Oscar/West for sure, and Nash/CP3/Wade worth thinking about too. Lots of room for productive comparison I think, where cross position comparisons can often feel a little empty.

[penbeast0]

1. George Mikan -- More dominant than LeBron or MJ, offset by a weaker era but should be in everyone's mix at least as a question mark.
2. Jerry West -- I have him over Oscar for a few reasons. Ability to play off ball, leadership (Oscar could be a grouch, to be polite), defense, a penchant for playoff heroics approached by few in NBA history. Oscar has that amazing playmaking and superior durability.
3. Strongly considered Steph Curry here (or higher), just one more season approaching his peak years and I have him top 10. Considering David Robinson on the same theory that Garnett got in; he was an incredible floor raiser for weak teams and a terrific second option/best defender on strong ones. The main different is Garnett has longevity and that one nasty series against Hakeem that everyone remembers. Also looking at Oscar, Kobe, Moses, Julius, and Karl Malone. Of them, the ones that separated themselves most from their peers were Cincinnati Oscar and New York Julius. Oscar did it for longer and the 70s (ABA and NBA) to early 80s that Julius starred in were, to me, a bit weaker than the 60s where Oscar was head and shoulders over everyone else in the NBA except West (and of course Russell and Wilt). Oscar's team results on offense are Steve Nash/John Stockton level, his individual numbers are even better, the big question for me is his defense and whether his perfectionism got in the way of his team results. For now, I give Oscar the benefit of the doubt though, again, it's hairline close.
3. Oscar Robertson

[Jaivl]

Most definitely will vote Kobe/Oscar/Dirk.

Stuff to think about: Is Karl Malone's longevity edge enough against those three? I think he was a tier below as a player at their bests. Mikan's placement. Don't really consider West here because of his short prime - am I wrong? Erving... what about him? Barkley vs Dirk? Robinson vs Dirk?

It feels to me like there a lot of guards worthy of comparison here - Kobe/Oscar/West for sure, and Nash/CP3/Wade worth thinking about too. Lots of room for productive comparison I think, where cross position comparisons can often feel a little empty.

And Curry!

[Jordan Syndrome]

1. George Mikan -- More dominant than LeBron or MJ, offset by a weaker era but should be in everyone's mix at least as a question mark.
2. Jerry West -- I have him over Oscar for a few reasons. Ability to play off ball, leadership (Oscar could be a grouch, to be polite), defense, a penchant for playoff heroics approached by few in NBA history. Oscar has that amazing playmaking and superior durability.
3. Strongly considered Steph Curry here (or higher), just one more season approaching his peak years and I have him top 10. Considering David Robinson on the same theory that Garnett got in; he was an incredible floor raiser for weak teams and a terrific second option/best defender on strong ones. The main different is Garnett has longevity and that one nasty series against Hakeem that everyone remembers. Also looking at Oscar, Kobe, Moses, Julius, and Karl Malone. Of them, the ones that separated themselves most from their peers were Cincinnati Oscar and New York Julius. Oscar did it for longer and the 70s (ABA and NBA) to early 80s that Julius starred in were, to me, a bit weaker than the 60s where Oscar was head and shoulders over everyone else in the NBA except West (and of course Russell and Wilt). Oscar's team results on offense are Steve Nash/John Stockton level, his individual numbers are even better, the big question for me is his defense and whether his perfectionism got in the way of his team results. For now, I give Oscar the benefit of the doubt though, again, it's hairline close.
3. Oscar Robertson

I'm not sure if Oscar teams resulta on offense are Nash levels.

[mailmp]

Oscar's team results on offense are Steve Nash/John Stockton level

This is a weird comment for two reasons. First is that no, they were not really at Nash level unless you get into questions of whether a lower rORTG in a small league is actually better than a higher rORTG in a large league, and that always felt rather tenuous. Second is that Stockton was not really leading top offences until late his career, when Hornacek joined, Malone was operating at his peak as a passer (and probably his peak outright), and Stockton himself was well past his peak and playing lower minutes.

[mailmp]

1. Oscar Robertson
I am not judging these players for what they would do in the modern league. West’s spacing would indeed be an innate advantage now — but I am judging them in the context of the entire history of the league, and I think Oscar had a clear step up throughout their careers that would likely carry over up to the more recent three-point explosion. I also am not penalising Oscar for a smaller playoff sample resulting from inferior teams and a dramatically more difficult conference. I do not think West really had much of a true playoff advantage, if any, and for the talk about Oscar’s teams missing postseasons (because of the aforementioned team and conference obstacles), West missing postseasons his team made is a much more severe issue. I see West as a good defender but not by an amount that offsets Oscar’s stronger offence or his longevity edge; his defence strikes me as Wade level, which is not much of a needle-mover this early in these discussions.

2. Kobe Bryant
Mostly a longevity case here, but he did have high tier offensive impact, an excellent (if overblown) résumé, and clear evidence of complementary play with other stars. He and Oscar are much closer to #17 than they are to #9, so broad strokes I do not care if like West or Dirk end up getting enough backers to switch that up.

3. Dirk Nowitzki
Some of the arguments here for Kobe belonging below Dirk are strong. I am inclined to agree with Ben that team construction may have overstated Dirk’s impact, but I also do think he undersold Dirk (and the evaluation he mentions at the end of his profile which would have put Dirk up to #14 is one I feel he should have followed), and I am willing to be swayed as to which better merits the 2000s bronze medal. These three and Bird are all in the same general tier for me, so the order does not really make a difference. All exhibited high enough playoff impact for me to comfortably place them above West as a consequence of his weaker longevity and injured postseasons.

[90sAllDecade]

My picks aren't set in stone and if someone can prove Kobe and Oscar are better than West in two way impact or playoffs I am open to changing my mind.

That being said, I'll be bringing up some of the info I'm seeing on West. If someone has more film on Oscar or evidence I am open as well.

As I've said in previous posts Jerry West was an all around dog on defense, many impact or defensive stats weren't tracked in his era but he is very impressive and perhaps a tier above Oscar in this regard from what I'm seeing.

For example this is an All Star game which doesn't mean anything and look at his defensive presence, along with quick hands for steals and blocks in this clip. He was so intense all the time, it's just who he was as a competitior.

Watch on YouTube

West was motivated by a relentless drive to succeed. Years after a game in which he hit 16 of 17 shots from the field, sank all 12 free throw attempts, and notched 12 rebounds, 12 assists and 10 blocked shots, West told the National Sports Daily, “Defensively, from a team standpoint, I didn’t feel I played very well. Very rarely was I satisfied with how I played.” This obsessive quest for perfection was a constant during West’s playing years, and it continued in his later roles as coach and general manager of the Lakers and as president of basketball operations for the Memphis Grizzlies.

Equally legendary was West’s tolerance for pain. Not blessed with great size, strength, or dribbling ability, West made up for these deficiencies with pure hustle and an apparent lack of regard for his body. He broke his nose at least nine times. On more than one occasion West had to be helped to the court before games in which he ultimately scored 30 or 40 points.

Despite a level of intensity so high it could melt lead, West was one of the NBA's most admired and well-liked figures. His ferocity rarely, if ever, rubbed players, coaches or fans the wrong way.

https://www.nba.com/history/legends/profiles/jerry-west

I haven't even touched base on his skill and how incredible he is under pressure and in the playoffs, the guy was exciting honestly.

[penbeast0]

Most definitely will vote Kobe/Oscar/Dirk.

Stuff to think about: Is Karl Malone's longevity edge enough against those three? I think he was a tier below as a player at their bests. Mikan's placement. Don't really consider West here because of his short prime - am I wrong? Erving... what about him? Barkley vs Dirk? Robinson vs Dirk?

It feels to me like there a lot of guards worthy of comparison here - Kobe/Oscar/West for sure, and Nash/CP3/Wade worth thinking about too. Lots of room for productive comparison I think, where cross position comparisons can often feel a little empty.

And Curry!

Jerry West had a short prime? He was one of the top two guards in the league in his second season (32/8/5) and continued to be great until 73 (23/4/9) after leading the Lakers to the title in 72. That's more than a decade in an era with inferior medicine and equipment. It's a longer prime than Oscar (Oscar was a great rookie so had a 1 year edge on West but never scored 20ppg again after 71 and declined in efficiency as well after that magical year so his prime is a year shorter than West's though healthier). Heck, Jordan's prime is only 11 years if you exclude his baseball seasons, his 18 year sophomore season, and his time in Washington. I think you might be able to say injury prone, but short prime isn't accurate.

[penbeast0]

Oscar's team results on offense are Steve Nash/John Stockton level

This is a weird comment for two reasons. First is that no, they were not really at Nash level unless you get into questions of whether a lower rORTG in a small league is actually better than a higher rORTG in a large league, and that always felt rather tenuous. Second is that Stockton was not really leading top offences until late his career, when Hornacek joined, Malone was operating at his peak as a passer (and probably his peak outright), and Stockton himself was well past his peak and playing lower minutes.

I consider what Stockton was able to achieve with the likes of Mark Eaton and Greg Ostertag as his center (to say nothing of some pretty mediocre wings prior to Hornacek) to be at the level of offensive game raising of Nash. Oscar's teammates were less . . . offensively challenged, but not great other than Jerry Lucas who I am higher on than most here. Whereas Nash was playing consistently with 3-4 excellent offensive teammates (sometimes 5) and in the SSOL system where they played small to create mismatches, sacrificing defense to create offense. He was truly great at it but I'm not sure that he exceeded expectations more than Oscar or Stockton and he didn't bring the rebounding and scoring of Oscar or the defense and ironman consistency of Stockton. You have to look at context.

[Jaivl]

Most definitely will vote Kobe/Oscar/Dirk.

Stuff to think about: Is Karl Malone's longevity edge enough against those three? I think he was a tier below as a player at their bests. Mikan's placement. Don't really consider West here because of his short prime - am I wrong? Erving... what about him? Barkley vs Dirk? Robinson vs Dirk?

It feels to me like there a lot of guards worthy of comparison here - Kobe/Oscar/West for sure, and Nash/CP3/Wade worth thinking about too. Lots of room for productive comparison I think, where cross position comparisons can often feel a little empty.

And Curry!

Jerry West had a short prime? He was one of the top two guards in the league in his second season (32/8/5) and continued to be great until 73 (23/4/9) after leading the Lakers to the title in 72. That's more than a decade in an era with inferior medicine and equipment. It's a longer prime than Oscar (Oscar was a great rookie so had a 1 year edge on West but never scored 20ppg again after 71 and declined in efficiency as well after that magical year so his prime is a year shorter than West's though healthier). Heck, Jordan's prime is only 11 years if you exclude his baseball seasons, his 18 year sophomore season, and his time in Washington. I think you might be able to say injury prone, but short prime isn't accurate.

Yeah, but you kind of have to take out at least 2 years, probably more than that, due to injuries. You end up with about 9 seasons at best, and I'd argue for less.

[Hal14]

12. Kobe Bryant
13. Oscar Robertson
14. Jerry West

Each of these 3 guys can actually make a pretty good case for being top 10 all time.

To make the case for Kobe, I'll start by explaining why I have Kobe ranked over Shaq, who got voted in the no. 8 spot in this poll:

-Kobe won 2 titles without Shaq and Kobe was finals MVP both times whereas Shaq only won 1 title without Kobe and that time he needed Wade to help him and Wade was finals MVP.

-Kobe had more of a killer instinct and will to win

-Kobe had better work ethic

-Kobe was better/more consistent on defense than Shaq

-Kobe had better longevity

-The Lakers (with both Shaq and Kobe) lost to the Jazz 4 games to 1 in 97 and they got swept by the Jazz in 98 - I put more of the blame for that on Shaq than Kobe though, since Shaq was in his prime whereas Kobe was still a baby, only first 2 years in the league as a 18/19 year old.

-Shaq got swept in the playoffs before he teamed up with Kobe and Kobe got swept in the playoffs after he teamed up with Shaq, but when Shaq got swept in 95, Shaq was in his 3rd season and was literally hitting his prime and his Magic team got swept by a Rockets team that won 10 fewer games than Shaq's Magic during the regular season. Compare that with Kobe, who was in his 15th season in 2011 when his Lakers got swept by the Mavs. Kobe was pretty much past his prime at that point..he was 15 seasons in, had already won 5 titles and endured quite a bit of wear and tear from all those seasons and all of those postseason runs..especially after the previous 2 seasons where his Lakers won the title so those are long/draining playoff runs. Kobe's Lakers got swept by a Mavs team that had the same record as them during the regular season (not nearly as bad as getting swept by a team that you were 10 games better than)

-The fact that Kobe played his entire career for the Lakers shows 2 things. 1, it shows Kobe's loyalty to the organization and 2) It shows the Lakers had faith in Kobe and they saw him as a player worth building a franchise around and keeping him with the team long term. Shaq on the other hand, played for 6 teams. He could have stayed in Orlando and had a dynasty going with Penny, they were being billed as the team of the future. But he left for greener pastures (and more $) in LA.

The other part to Kobe's case is that he was an extremely similar player to Jordan, in many ways. Some would say a carbon copy. He's closer to a Jordan clone than any other player ever. So if Jordan is no. 2 all-time (many people, including myself have Jordan no. 1 all time) then Kobe has a case to be top 10, and definitely has a case for the no. 11 spot here.....especially since Kobe had better longevity than Jordan and won not 1 but 2 titles where no one on his team is considered a top 30 or even top 50 player of all time (and Kobe was finals MVP both times), whereas Jordan had the benefit of Pippen (a consensus top 30 player of all time) for all 6 of his titles. Not saying I put Kobe over Jordan, just saying that he's a very similar player who is comparable to Jordan in many areas and even better than Jordan in a couple areas too so he has a strong case for a top 11 spot.

[Gibson22]

1) Jerry West. best offensive player left between contenders for the spot (and imho best in the 3 point era, at worst top 3) better defender than my next picks (one of the top defenders for his decade and his position) best playoff performer between contenders.

2) I've changed my opinion on him so Imma say oscar. Goat level offensive player, great defender even if people don't know about it. His usual criticism are playoff success and the pace of his era bringing his stats up, but: he was a top 2 shooter in the league, the best rebounder at his position and the best passer in the league. He also was obviously an elite scorer: he scored 29.3 on about +8RTS% in his 10 years at cincinnati: slightly superior to jerry west even if I don't feel comfortable ranking him as a better scorer than him, significantly superior to any other scorer (baylor, bellamy, pettit) of that decade not named wilt. So, if a guy is a top 2/3 scorer of his decade, best passer, best rebounder for his position and is a very good defender, how can he be lower than this? I get that the guy hasn't done anything in the playoffs but I think his team was just ass and they met way better teams, and his level didn't dip.
PS: did you know that, in 1963, the royals took the celtics to game 7, with Oscar averaging 33/12/8 on 58 TS%, and in game 7 bill russell (20/24/4 on 8/14 and 4/6 from the line) had the help of sam jones who scored 47 POINTS on 18/27 and 11/12, but also 31 from heinson and 21/16assists from cousy? pretty unbelievable that a team with such a great player in bill russell could have so many other great players (also rookie havlicek). Oscar still had 43 on 11/24 and a crazy 20/21 from the line, but unfortunately didn't have great teammates stepping up

3). Kobe Bryant. amazing prime and average prime year, he's not far from the standard o a borderline top 10 in any facet: prime, peak, longevity, playoff performances, era he played in etc. there are multiple guys left that are above him in everyone of those things but I'm not sure that there is anyone left can surpass him all things considered. Malone has the longevity but was a worse player and he doesn't have playoff success/performance, erving was probably more dominant in his decade than kobe was in his but he has worse impact stats, was a worse defender and has less playoff success, drob was probably on par with kobe factoring defense+offense+longevity but kobe has more playoff success and legacy and I also think that his kind of offense had an IT factor as far as team success in the playoffs, especially compared to a very good but not great offensive player like drob. guys like dirk, nash, cp3, curry were better offensive player but they all fall short all things considered, etc

[DQuinn1575]

Time to vote here:
1. Oscar - year after year put up incredible stats. Good enough to beat out Wilt and Russell for MVP. Considered by virtually all who saw him at the time to be by far best perimeter player of era. Good/smart enough to assume a lesser, but still starring role on all-time great team.
1961-1968 - first 8 years Oscar is ahead of West in mvp voting every year but 1; West was barely ahead. 1969 neither shows on b-reference, but Oscar was 1st team nba, not West,
so for the first 9 years, when Oscar was at his peak he was considered better than West. Basically 8 wins and 1 narrow loss. ESPN Sports Century- Robertson 36, West 62.
AP player of the Century- Oscar 2nd behind only Jordan, West 9th.
1986 poll - Oscar second best player of all-time picked by panel. (Jabbar 1st)
Probably every basketball magazine or book I read in the 60s-70s.
Virtually everything I read or saw at the time- Oscar was better.
Early and mid 60s, people didn't debate Oscar vs. West, they debated Oscar vs Russell and Wilt.
Oscar aged quicker than West. The West I saw was better than Oscar.
And West is a Top 20 player, and Oscar was considered much better.
I’m not using any of these as proof Oscar was better; I’m trying to convey to people who didn’t read or talk to people in the 70s about how good he was.
People who didn’t experience any of this are going to post how they know so much more than virtually everyone who saw them play.


2. Kobe - took two teams to the title that were definitely below the norm in terms of talent. Wade, Barry, Dirk can all claim one, but Kobe was also pretty key in 3 other championships. It's a team guy, and he has more success as a leading player than anyone else left.

3. Dirk - Long career, great prime, and led his team to title. Probably not best defender here, but taking him (for now) over others.

[Joao Saraiva]

Votes
1. Kobe Bryant
2. Jerry West
3. Karl Malone

Plenty of players left. But for me, no one better than Kobe Bryant.

He's among the best volume scorers this game has ever seen, with 2006 being the year he showed he could carry a good offense based on that mostly. The Lakers were 7th in SRS and 8th in ORTG. Given the roster they had, how amazing is that?

He also has a very good longevity, and in the playoffs he was consistent. His ts% was not among the elite ts% in the league, but it was sustainable in the playoffs for the most part while he kept being a volume scorer. He was also very low in TOV% trough his entire career, so there is more efficiency there that isn't measured in ts%.

He played very well in different roles:
- as a youngster we saw him as a 2nd fiddle to Shaq. He showed tremendous man to man defense, awesome playmaking abilities and, obviously, a ton of great scoring games. The best year was 01, and few superstars have replicated what Kobe did against Sacramento and San Antonio in their entire careers;
- he proved himself while playing with a not so good cast (being nice to the cast here). Kobe leading the 06 Lakers into the playoffs speaks highly of what he provided even with a bad cast surrounding him;
- he proved himself to be a legit #1 option later when the Lakers made a great trio of him, Gasol and Odom. They won 2 championships in 09 and 10, and we saw some truly epic performances by Kobe in both WCFs. Again, I'm talking about a ceiling most stars have failed to show us in their careers;
- in 2013 his will put a disfunctional Lakers squad in the playoffs, proving his longevity and power as a scorer. Too bad we couldn't see him that post season because of his injury.

Accodales wise, the resume is impressive. You can check that on basketball reference, his 1st team and top 5 MVP voting years are among the best ever. He got 1 MVP only (and rightfully so) but the circumstances were also hard. He went up against some of the best ever versions of LeBron in the RS (09 and 10) and once he was in his prime and leading his squad he had no chance because of lack of enough wins (05, 06, 07).

He was not as influential as some bigs on D and his help D was average for me. But his footwork and dedication on man to man D made him elite in that regard. I think he was very consistent in his 1st years with Shaq, and then later he was an excelent man to man defender at times. But I'm OK with that, some coasting on D is natural once stars get older.

[penbeast0]

Time to vote here:
1. Oscar - year after year put up incredible stats. Good enough to beat out Wilt and Russell for MVP. Considered by virtually all who saw him at the time to be by far best perimeter player of era. Good/smart enough to assume a lesser, but still starring role on all-time great team.
1961-1968 - first 8 years Oscar is ahead of West in mvp voting every year but 1; West was barely ahead. 1969 neither shows on b-reference, but Oscar was 1st team nba, not West,
so for the first 9 years, when Oscar was at his peak he was considered better than West. Basically 8 wins and 1 narrow loss. ESPN Sports Century- Robertson 36, West 62.
AP player of the Century- Oscar 2nd behind only Jordan, West 9th.
1986 poll - Oscar second best player of all-time picked by panel. (Jabbar 1st)
Probably every basketball magazine or book I read in the 60s-70s.
Virtually everything I read or saw at the time- Oscar was better.
Early and mid 60s, people didn't debate Oscar vs. West, they debated Oscar vs Russell and Wilt.
Oscar aged quicker than West. The West I saw was better than Oscar.
And West is a Top 20 player, and Oscar was considered much better.
I’m not using any of these as proof Oscar was better; I’m trying to convey to people who didn’t read or talk to people in the 70s about how good he was.
People who didn’t experience any of this are going to post how they know so much more than virtually everyone who saw them play.


2. Kobe - took two teams to the title that were definitely below the norm in terms of talent. Wade, Barry, Dirk can all claim one, but Kobe was also pretty key in 3 other championships. It's a team guy, and he has more success as a leading player than anyone else left.

3. Dirk - Long career, great prime, and led his team to title. Probably not best defender here, but taking him (for now) over others.

IF it was just regular season (where these awards are made), I might vote Oscar over Jerry too but postseasons are important and while Oscar had strong postseason numbers, West just plain killed it at times. His postseason performances are up there with the likes of Jordan.

AS for your comment about Kobe having "more success as a leading player than anyone left, " it's not even close as long as Mikan is still out there. Kobe had 2 titles as the main man, plus some as Robin to Shaq's batman. Mikan was always the main man on his teams and had . . . seven.

[Odinn21]

Time to vote here:
Oscar
Good enough to beat out Wilt and Russell for MVP.

TBH, I don't much care for accolades in the casual sense. I still put some importance as their career resume and I have them under consideration because I always think like "if I were a superstar, I sure would want a damn good resume".
Robertson's MVP is even more important than that labelling. Not only he managed to snatch an MVP from Chamberlain and Russell, from Russell's first All-Star season in '58 to Abdul-Jabbar's last MVP season in '80, Oscar Robertson was the only non-big player who got the award.

Since MVP's inception, these are the first 3 non-big players won the award;
Bob Cousy in 1957 (Russell's rookie season which he missed one third of season with 24 games and Chamberlain wasn't around.)
Oscar Robertson in 1964 (Right in the middle of Russell's and Chamberlain's prime, West and Baylor were also around and in their respective primes.)
Julius Erving in 1981.

That is some MVP award to have. One of the most valuable and most important one among MVP awards, if not the most.

[penbeast0]

Most definitely will vote Kobe/Oscar/Dirk.

Stuff to think about: Is Karl Malone's longevity edge enough against those three? I think he was a tier below as a player at their bests. Mikan's placement. Don't really consider West here because of his short prime - am I wrong? Erving... what about him? Barkley vs Dirk? Robinson vs Dirk?


And Curry!

Jerry West had a short prime? He was one of the top two guards in the league in his second season (32/8/5) and continued to be great until 73 (23/4/9) after leading the Lakers to the title in 72. That's more than a decade in an era with inferior medicine and equipment. It's a longer prime than Oscar (Oscar was a great rookie so had a 1 year edge on West but never scored 20ppg again after 71 and declined in efficiency as well after that magical year so his prime is a year shorter than West's though healthier). Heck, Jordan's prime is only 11 years if you exclude his baseball seasons, his 18 year sophomore season, and his time in Washington. I think you might be able to say injury prone, but short prime isn't accurate.

Yeah, but you kind of have to take out at least 2 years, probably more than that, due to injuries. You end up with about 9 seasons at best, and I'd argue for less.

Jerry West averaged over 39 minutes a game for a 932 game career. That's more games for West in LA than Jordan played in Chicago (Jordan moves back in front if you count those two ugly years in Washington). Jordan had a 14 game season (his second) and a 17 game season (baseball), West never played less than 50 games though he had 2 seasons of less than 60 and he only missed one year of playoffs. Those two seasons of 50-59 games he played 13 and 15 games in the playoffs (in a shorter format than today).

If you are looking at primes (West - 1962-73, Oscar = 61-71) then West played 812 regular season games and 140 playoff games while Oscar played 833 regular season and 61 playoff games. I can't see giving Oscar a huge boost for length of prime based on that; I think you are buying into something you heard without actually looking at the numbers it is based on though. West was injured more than Oscar but his prime was longer so it evens out; especially when you consider that West was regularly playing deep into the postseason.

[Jaivl]

Jerry West had a short prime? He was one of the top two guards in the league in his second season (32/8/5) and continued to be great until 73 (23/4/9) after leading the Lakers to the title in 72. That's more than a decade in an era with inferior medicine and equipment. It's a longer prime than Oscar (Oscar was a great rookie so had a 1 year edge on West but never scored 20ppg again after 71 and declined in efficiency as well after that magical year so his prime is a year shorter than West's though healthier). Heck, Jordan's prime is only 11 years if you exclude his baseball seasons, his 18 year sophomore season, and his time in Washington. I think you might be able to say injury prone, but short prime isn't accurate.

Yeah, but you kind of have to take out at least 2 years, probably more than that, due to injuries. You end up with about 9 seasons at best, and I'd argue for less.

Jerry West averaged over 39 minutes a game for a 932 game career. That's more games for West in LA than Jordan played in Chicago (Jordan moves back in front if you count those two ugly years in Washington).

If you are looking at primes (West - 1962-73, Oscar = 61-71) then West played 812 regular season games and 140 playoff games while Oscar played 833 regular season and 61 playoff games. I can't see giving Oscar a huge boost for length of prime based on that; I think you are buying into something you heard without actually looking at the numbers it is based on though.

I'll ignore the arbitrary prime tresholds and just say that the ~20 games Jordan played on 1986 *while being avaliable for the playoffs* are far more valuable than the ~140 RS games West played *on seasons he missed the playoffs* via injury (1967, 1971).

Just the same as, for example, 2009 Garnett. Marginal value on getting your team to a higher seed, but that's it. And, by your own admission, that's about 20% of West's prime.