Why is it controversial to say Kobe is not a top 15 player all-time?

[ceiling raiser]

Fully serious thread.

Speaking about on RealGM specifically. The general population obviously has an affinity based on playstyle, personality cult, and the LA thing.

Gun to your head, can you say Kobe was ever an above-average defender for his position? Was he ever the best wing in the league? Was his longevity actually elite? Was his peak?

He was a very solid offensive player with a pretty resilient scoring game. But let’s price that for what it is.

[Cavsfansince84]

Much more controversial I would say on the gb compared to this board. I see him as firmly in the 11-17 group leaning more towards 14-17. Mostly because I think he had a very combative personality up until about 2007 which is a definite weakness along with his shot selection for a lot of his career. Some people can accept this criticism of him while others tend to act like it isn't there or can be swept to the side due to winning 5 rings.

[70sFan]

I don't think it's controversial, although having him very far from that certainly isn't common even here.

I definitely think Kobe was above average defender in his best defensive years (2000-02, 2008).

I think he was the best wing in the league in 2001, 2003 and probably 2008.

His longevity is certainly elite, though not in GOAT territory.

[AEnigma]

Gun to your head, can you say Kobe was ever an above-average defender for his position?

… Yes. The problem is that his position is not particularly valuable defensively, and despite the (mostly undeserved) all-defensive nods, he was never a Kidd/TAllen level outlier.

Was he ever the best wing in the league?

… Yes.

Was his longevity actually elite?

Well there are not ten players with better longevity, so yeah.

Was his peak?

Depends on your framing, but I would struggle to move him out of the top twenty.

He was a very solid offensive player with a pretty resilient scoring game. But let’s price that for what it is.

Funny how many all-time players could be reduced to that.

[falcolombardi]

Even in places lower than him than mainstream (like this board) he is seen as a top 15 career by essentially everyone

I think kobe suffers from some thinghs

Underwhelming impact metrics, mainly in regular season at least relative to the first tier players there (think lebron, duncan, garnett)

Played a sometimes frustrating (heroball) style of play that people see as lower ceiling

His historically great playoff resilience is not always weighted enough

Ironically enough tweak them a bit and they are similar reasons to why someone could be low on hakeem to some degree (switch heroball with lower offensive portability and just average passing)

[OhayoKD]

Fully serious thread.

Speaking about on RealGM specifically. The general population obviously has an affinity based on playstyle, personality cult, and the LA thing.

Gun to your head, can you say Kobe was ever an above-average defender for his position? Was he ever the best wing in the league? Was his longevity actually elite? Was his peak?

He was a very solid offensive player with a pretty resilient scoring game. But let’s price that for what it is.

I would say he was an above average defender for most of his prime and even a very good one for his position from 01-03. I think he had a reasonable claim as the best player in the world in 2008, has some strong impact signals despite being played in sub-optimal(for impact generation) ways, was one of the most resilient playoff performers, had sole all-time playoff runs(2001 was special), was largely consistent and healthy for an extended prime, and even using inputs for someone relatively low on his peak(ben), his total "career value"(weightings based on studies on srs and what leads to championships) was above bird and magic iirc at 9th(well below kg fwiw).


Personally, on an era-relative basis i think i might have him top 10 based on the longevity even if I take a low end estimate of his peak. In absolute terms i'm probably taking him over someone like bird even in terms of prime(though I guess i'd be taking the likes of giannis or curry as significantly better with this framework).

If someone was to weigh the 5 championships, 3 fmvps, and mvp, his top 10 case, let alone top 15, is arguably strengthened. It's honestly difficult for me to construct a consistent criteria where Kobe doesn't end up there beyond putting it all to peak and taking a low end eval there.

[henshao]

I think Penbeast (?) likes the term heliocentric, I like the term "tentpole," but either way the controversy is that the narrative surrounding a good Lakers team will already have wind in its sails but combined with the star power of an Ersatz Jordan both in and out of a tentpole scheme and good luck stopping it

[Blame Rasho]

I don't think it's controversial, although having him very far from that certainly isn't common even here.

I definitely think Kobe was above average defender in his best defensive years (2000-02, 2008).

I think he was the best wing in the league in 2001, 2003 and probably 2008.

His longevity is certainly elite, though not in GOAT territory.

It is easier to say he is top 15 rather than to say he isn’t top 15.

It is a minority opinion to most reasonable historians and followers of basketball.

Give us another 20 years then maybe it might be easier to say he isn’t.

His has the accolades to be in the top 15 and heck even top 10 at this moment in time.

[Owly]

Fully serious thread.

Speaking about on RealGM specifically. The general population obviously has an affinity based on playstyle, personality cult, and the LA thing.

Gun to your head, can you say Kobe was ever an above-average defender for his position? Was he ever the best wing in the league? Was his longevity actually elite? Was his peak?

He was a very solid offensive player with a pretty resilient scoring game. But let’s price that for what it is.

May or may not do a longer post (not wholly unsympathetic to the view given here) but on the bolded specifically, I think asking this question undermines a serious point. His net career and prime defensive value may well be vastly overrated by many. But setting such a low bar "above-average ... for his position" (not even prefaced by "clearly") and "ever" invites people to point to stuff clearly above positional norms (e.g. https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/2010-rapm , https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/2001-npi-rapm) sets the question up for failure, I think. I don't know, would you argue individual years numbers are too noisy? Depends on data source you trust I suppose but that 97-14 source where career is -0.3 (negative being bad) accounting for position is otoh probably around positional average ... I suppose if one trusts the 97-22 version more (2.2, positive is bad) you could maybe argue such seasons as lucky outliers (the Bryant sympathetic view might be that the latter source clouds signal with junky data from his last two years)? Fwiw, in CTG covered era for his best (CTG available) years (04-10) even though not good there's only one year where it's far from average (negative) and there are some load-based mitigating circumstances there. Happy to learn more where you're coming from but even trying to be sympathetic the present phrasing seems like a tough sell.

[Texas Chuck]

IT's not controversial in the least. It's just he has fans who get all worked up any time anyone doesn't love him as much as they do.

And I say that as someone who has Kobe firmly in my top 15. But I see zero reason anyone should feel obligated to. It's not like all of Oscar/West/Dirk/KG/Malone/Malone/Chuck/Dream are all clearly worse than him by any means.

[LukaTheGOAT]

You can have Kobe outside the top 15, I would just say to consider the following.


Kobe likely was a MVP level player for a decent amount of time, longer than some of the other guys he is competing with for a top 15 spot ever.

I think there is for one, reason to believe, that Kobe's defense in the PS from say 06-10, was better than it was during the RS.

But also just looking at total career value metrics, Kobe's total career value comes out to the point where in order for him to have accumulated so much value he would have A) had to have been around a perennial MVP level B)Had outlier longevity, where his 11-13 seasons, were pretty much around the same value as 01-10, which I don't really buy.

For example,

Ben Taylor's Plus-Minus GOAT List (Goes from 97 to 2017); Scaled APM used for this

1. Lebron
2. KG
3. Duncan
4. Shaq
5. Dirk
6. CP3
7. Kobe
8. Kidd
9. Wade
10. Nash

RAPTOR Career Value (Goes back to 70's)

1. Lebron
2. John Stockton
3. MJ
4-7(Cp3, Duncan, Kidd KG, Magic in some order)
8. Kobe

All-time Value Shares List
1. Lebron
2. Kareem
3. MJ
4. Karl Malone
5. Duncan
6. Shaq
7. KG
8. Wilt
9. Hakeem
10. Kobe

There are more lists, to pick from, but I think you get the point. Kobe's name consistently shows up on career value lists with other guys who were perennial MVP forces, the only exceptions being Kidd and Stockton. Now of course this is MY interpretation (and I would imagine many others who believe Kobe was a consistent MVP level guy) is that Kidd and Stockton find their way on here, because they played their role really well and were game-manager types. Stockton has always been loved by the box-score because of his high-efficiency, low-turnovers, and high-steals numbers; his inability to do anything "wrong," always helped him rate highly here, even though I would argue his conservative style prevented him from applying as much pressure to the defense as he could. But even outside of that, guards who can pass, and play the game-manager role well, typically do well in plus-minus because their role is somewhat simpler, and they do a really good job at it. However, if you give guys like Kidd and Stockton an expanded role on offense out of necessity (alas a Kobe offensive load), I do not think you would see them stick out as much in these career value metrics.

Kobe being just an effective player for good while adds up.

I also think Kobe's has a lot of data-points outside of just looking at the basic box-score that make him look very good.

Like the Lakers offense during the PS:

2006-10 LAL PS:

+4.58 rORTG in 3255 min Kobe on floor
50.02% from 2
35.46% from 3

-5.70 rORTG in 562 min Kobe off floor
47.39% from 2
34.02% from 3


His 3-year PS Peak is absurd:

08-10 Kobe in the PS:
(2726 minutes)

▫️30.4 IA pts/75
▫️5.3 ast/75
▫️5.5 reb/75
▫️1.5 stl/75
▫️+3.9 rTS%
▫️+6.7 rORTG and -3.6 rDRTG
▫️+9.9 Net Swing

In the playoffs from 2008 to 2010, Kobe Bryant faced off against defenses that (on average) held their opponents to -2.9 points per 100 possessions in the regular season (from average).

And his resilience:

Kobe Bryant against Elite Defenses (-4 rDRTG or better) from 2008-2010:

▫️ 29.1 PPG
▫️ 5.3 RPG
▫️ 5.4 APG
▫️ 46-34-85 splits
▫️ 53.8 TS% (+2.7 rTS%)
▫️ 16 games played

Finally, maybe you could give him extra points for looking like maybe the most valuable player in arguably the post dominant PS run by a team ever (2001 Lakers).

2001 Kobe in the PS

Backpicks BPM-8.3
AuPM/G-6.9
PIPM-4.14
VORP-1.5

2001 Shaq in the PS

Backpicks BPM-7.4
AuPM/G-6.4
PIPM-2.80
VORP-1.4

[No-more-rings]

I think Kobe was a positive defender from like 2000-2003 and from 2008-2010. DRAPM generally agrees. That effort fizzled out from 2011 onward, but he was still a really good player from 2011-2013 even despite it.

[penbeast0]

Quick side note and not to derail (can open a thread about it if you want to), but Stockton was not a low turnover PG. What he was was a ridiculously high assist rate PG (best in NBA history) while not having Hardenesque turnover numbers. So he was an average turnover % more or less for an NBA PG while having double the normal number of assists giving him a great A/T rate but not necessarily low turnovers.

[dygaction]

It is about the same controversial to say Kobe is a top 5 as to say he is below 15.

[Bad Gatorade]

Honestly, probably a combination of accolades, eye test and cult of personality?

Having an MVP, 5 rings, 2 finals MVPs and a lot of defensive awards anchors us to the idea that he's truly great. Kobe had a few really, really good playoff runs too, and watching him play is clearly mesmerising. Practically anything that's not numerically related points to Kobe being a top 10 guy of all time, let alone top 15.

In terms of statistics... Kobe is not a shoo-in top 15 guy of all time (although part of this also stems from the lack of available statistics historically/interpretation of them). RAPM is generally not flattering to him at all relative to his reputation -

* In 2002-2011 RAPM, Kobe appears 5th. Fantastic result, to be sure, but it's also a deviation from his other larger samples (possibly due to the incorporation of coaching in this sample - Phil Jackson being a notable negative on offence really strikes me as off).
* 2006-2011 RAPM, he is 13th.
* 2008-2011 RAPM, he is 15th.
* Kobe's 5 year RAPM peak in Ahmed Cheema's sample is 5th (occurring in the 2004-08, 2005-09, 2006-10 samples).
* Kobe's 2001-2015 RAPM places him at 25th.
* Kobe is equal 72nd in 26 year RAPM :O

Kobe's playoff RAPM numbers aren't really anything noteworthy/different either - he is 53rd in playoff RAPM from 1998-2019 (and still a negative on defence) and things like jalengreen's RAPM (which places him very shockingly low on the whole) and prior informed playoff RAPM from apbrmetrics probably give him a slight playoff increase, but nothing too crazy.

Box score aggregates (e.g. Win Shares peaking at 4th in the league, 19th career wise), VORP (12th, but missing a few of the best players in NBA history) also place him as great, but arguably not top 15.

Now...

Which camp is correct?

I think there's some truth to Kobe's offence being highly malleable and incredibly easy to build a great offensive team around, so his offensive metrics probably underrate his greatness. I do think his profile of being an absurd tough shot maker began to really help in his later playoff runs especially. I can see some of the larger DRAPM samples being marred by inconsistency, bringing him down more than he probably should, although I do generally think that his defence was overrated, and his awards generally... gratuitous.

Much like almost every player ever, there's more wiggle room on Kobe than we'd like to admit. Statistically, Kobe being out of the top 15 is entirely defensible, but I also think Kobe makes one of the better cases of being "better than his statistics" than most players do.

But...

I also think that it just feels "right" to have Kobe up high, because for years, we were told that Kobe was the best in the game, even before he won an MVP award. There was a presence that Kobe had that the other greats of the era just didn't have, even if they were technically better players. Add that presence to the fandom that Kobe had all around the world, and yep, Kobe was larger than life. I do think that some of this feeling probably helps prop Kobe up a bit when placed against "comparable" players, even when somebody is trying to be consistent (for example, Dirk is an MVP, champion, all time great, is a very playoff resilient scorer that often appears well above Kobe in things like RAPM and box aggregates... but how many people are there ranking Dirk higher?). It just... it feels wrong to think that a guy that swept the NBA-loving world off their feet so heavily might be #18, you know?

[HeartBreakKid]

I would say the most obvious is that Kobe Bryant is probably the most popular basketball player of all time and is the icon of the most popular franchise. He is more popular than Jordan is internationally.

A close 1st is that when talking about all time list most people on the internet are really thinking back to the 90s. Players from previous eras are usually forgotten and thus if you say Kobe Bryant is a top 15 player from 1990-2023 that seems much harder to debate.


A third reason is other great players in the 00s did not win nearly as much as Bryant, and some of them are not perimeter players and many fans do not think of bigs when ranking players (see Tim Duncan). You can look at a player like Nowitzki and see he has a very comparable career to Bryant, but the narrative around their NBA careers are totally different.


Fourth, Jordan is the mainstream answer for who is the GOAT. Bryant vs Jordan, especially in the 00s was a big talking point in sports media. Even though they were never that close in terms of impact, the modern player is always going to have a generation behind them and the argument that players today are better than older eras.

The fact that Bryant also plays similar to Jordan makes it seem like one of the credentials to being the GOAT is who plays the most like Jordan, which of course is nonsense, but people used flaw logic. "Bryant plays closest to Jordan and Jordan is the GOAT: therefore, Bryant is the second best player of all time". It's a logical fallacy but Sportscenter isn't on there to talk logic.

[Cavsfansince84]

I would say the most obvious is that Kobe Bryant is probably the most popular basketball player of all time and is the icon of the most popular franchise. He is more popular than Jordan is internationally.

A close 1st is that when talking about all time list most people on the internet are really thinking back to the 90s. Players from previous eras are usually forgotten and thus if you say Kobe Bryant is a top 15 player from 1990-2023 that seems much harder to debate.

This is big not only because a lot of nba fans are under the age of 35 and didn't see players from before 1990 but also because many people do dismiss the eras before then or before 1980 as irrelevant when it comes to these lists. So right off the bat that eliminates half the players who commonly appear on top 10 or top 25 lists. Plus I also agree that amount of hype and media attention that Kobe got starting when he entered the league and then as heir apparent to MJ skewered perception of him in a big way. Many people heard him compared to MJ so much that they assume they are pretty close.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Because the Kobe fans won’t like you.

If I let 1960s players like OScar and West be above Kobe for being motpre impactful in their era and I let big men men have more defensive impact then Kobe may not be top 15.

[MiamiBulls]

Anyone can have any opinion they want which isn't controversial at all.

Will say personally, having Kobe Bryant outside the Top 15 is about controversial as having him inside the Top 5.

[Statlanta]

It's hard to believe someone with 5 championship rings in the modern era isn't a top 15 player especially with 2 Finals MVP.

Some people have him top 3 because of his fame and highlights so booting him down to almost 20 sounds blasphemous