Is Kobe given the most flack of any star? Highlighting inconsistent arguments against him.

[dhsilv2]

It seems to me that you believe all the other all time great teams were great because of Kg or Steph or whatever player but when you talk about Kobe it seems you are implying that he only gets by due to his teams. YOU are the biased one. You are contradictory in your view on manu and Kobe. You call manu an elite defender and then earlier said the numbers don’t paint Kobe as one. So now manu a better defender than Kobe? I’m not sure Manu was ever top 5 in nba, he at best was borderline top 10, your advanced stats aren’t gonna change my mind on that. You are clearly biased trying to push a guy that was barely top 10 in the league into the top 15 all time, either biased or delusional.

I rank Manu as a top 40 all time player. I said IF he had been healthy enough to play at the level he played at, things could have changed. That's a HUGE task and highly unlikely. But yeah, I think Manu overall was a much better defender. Kobe early in his career when he was highly focused and had Shaq to pickup more offensive load, he had a bit better on ball ability due to strength. But as Kobe's role expanded and he had to be the central offensive hub, his defense massively dropped off. So no, that's not an inconsistency at all.

I never said or implied that KG or Steph's teams were great only because of them. Draymond Green is an all time great defender with elite passing ability. He's been HUGE for Curry. Having Iggy off the bench was huge. KG doesn't win without Pierce having huge games in 2008.

The reason I focused so much on teammates before you bringing up the stupid finals MVP stuff, was that KG is the most extreme example possible of terrible teammates. Much like a Magic Johnson had a just absurdly great supporting cast his entire career. To rank players you have to do your best to pull away all those layers of differences. It might not be perfect.

To this point, I've only really shown you a consistent example of why KG would rank over Kobe and I showed that if someone is focused on peaks vs longevity that Curry's argument over Kobe isn't inconsistent.

I generally see Kobe around 11-15th all time. That's right where the vast majority of people rank him. I'd hardly call it a biased placement for him. And my process that ranks him there is certainly consistent, though with active players it does get a bit more difficult.

Where are your numbers that support manu being a better defender. You’ve based everything off of that to this point and mention Kobe having Shaq with no mention of Duncan again BIAS. The 9 first team all defense selections say otherwise but let me guess you don’t honor those because they weren’t deserved right?

The idea of peak is just flawed imo and seems like cherry-picking. The year Steph “PEAKED” he had a team more than capable of winning the chip but he did not he had the biggest choke in finals history during his PEAK. Kobe on the other hand won back 2 back titles as the man. To me that’s a higher Peak. Before you bring up your advanced stats I’m speaking on results, what actually happened.

I see Kobe generally ranked much higher than that outside of realgm. Players and coaches seem to rank him way higher than folks who just look at numbers like you and base everything off of hypotheticals and computers like these guys are robots.

I'm not going to go back and fourth on this Kobe vs Manu. The goal was to point out that most posters were are not inconsistent. If you want to dig into Manu vs Kobe go through the RAPM data. I've already posted a perfectly good link, you can see the impact data for yourself.

We also covered the finals MVP not being useful, that applies in general to all awards. Though defensive awards are unquestionably the worst of the worst in terms of the media being to properly assign the correct players. But again, I already covered why I don't use media awards in general. They give you a good view of how the media saw the league at the time. That's not meaningless, but I wouldn't judge two players based on awards.

And...you just went with the Skip "choke" crap. Not even worth continuing to discuss basketball with someone who resorts to childish language.

[flytimes11]

I rank Manu as a top 40 all time player. I said IF he had been healthy enough to play at the level he played at, things could have changed. That's a HUGE task and highly unlikely. But yeah, I think Manu overall was a much better defender. Kobe early in his career when he was highly focused and had Shaq to pickup more offensive load, he had a bit better on ball ability due to strength. But as Kobe's role expanded and he had to be the central offensive hub, his defense massively dropped off. So no, that's not an inconsistency at all.

I never said or implied that KG or Steph's teams were great only because of them. Draymond Green is an all time great defender with elite passing ability. He's been HUGE for Curry. Having Iggy off the bench was huge. KG doesn't win without Pierce having huge games in 2008.

The reason I focused so much on teammates before you bringing up the stupid finals MVP stuff, was that KG is the most extreme example possible of terrible teammates. Much like a Magic Johnson had a just absurdly great supporting cast his entire career. To rank players you have to do your best to pull away all those layers of differences. It might not be perfect.

To this point, I've only really shown you a consistent example of why KG would rank over Kobe and I showed that if someone is focused on peaks vs longevity that Curry's argument over Kobe isn't inconsistent.

I generally see Kobe around 11-15th all time. That's right where the vast majority of people rank him. I'd hardly call it a biased placement for him. And my process that ranks him there is certainly consistent, though with active players it does get a bit more difficult.

Where are your numbers that support manu being a better defender. You’ve based everything off of that to this point and mention Kobe having Shaq with no mention of Duncan again BIAS. The 9 first team all defense selections say otherwise but let me guess you don’t honor those because they weren’t deserved right?

The idea of peak is just flawed imo and seems like cherry-picking. The year Steph “PEAKED” he had a team more than capable of winning the chip but he did not he had the biggest choke in finals history during his PEAK. Kobe on the other hand won back 2 back titles as the man. To me that’s a higher Peak. Before you bring up your advanced stats I’m speaking on results, what actually happened.

I see Kobe generally ranked much higher than that outside of realgm. Players and coaches seem to rank him way higher than folks who just look at numbers like you and base everything off of hypotheticals and computers like these guys are robots.

I'm not going to go back and fourth on this Kobe vs Manu. The goal was to point out that most posters were are not inconsistent. If you want to dig into Manu vs Kobe go through the RAPM data. I've already posted a perfectly good link, you can see the impact data for yourself.

We also covered the finals MVP not being useful, that applies in general to all awards. Though defensive awards are unquestionably the worst of the worst in terms of the media being to properly assign the correct players. But again, I already covered why I don't use media awards in general. They give you a good view of how the media saw the league at the time. That's not meaningless, but I wouldn't judge two players based on awards.

And...you just went with the Skip "choke" crap. Not even worth continuing to discuss basketball with someone who resorts to childish language.

You are moving goalposts. You said Garnett had a higher peak and used Vorp to back you up. Then why I pointed out if he played with other talent his stats wouldn’t be as good and you used other stats to try and prove your point. Even using a stat that a bench player lead the league in. However Kobe Vorp in 08 was better than Kg which proves my point of his stats (Peak) wouldn’t be the same. You are biased and delusional and inconsistent. Done talking to you. Nobody is being childish except you, you act like this isn’t real life and everything is numbers and statistics based like the nba a calculator or something. Anybody that believes manu and Kobe are the same level isn’t worth debating with.

[dhsilv2]

Where are your numbers that support manu being a better defender. You’ve based everything off of that to this point and mention Kobe having Shaq with no mention of Duncan again BIAS. The 9 first team all defense selections say otherwise but let me guess you don’t honor those because they weren’t deserved right?

The idea of peak is just flawed imo and seems like cherry-picking. The year Steph “PEAKED” he had a team more than capable of winning the chip but he did not he had the biggest choke in finals history during his PEAK. Kobe on the other hand won back 2 back titles as the man. To me that’s a higher Peak. Before you bring up your advanced stats I’m speaking on results, what actually happened.

I see Kobe generally ranked much higher than that outside of realgm. Players and coaches seem to rank him way higher than folks who just look at numbers like you and base everything off of hypotheticals and computers like these guys are robots.

I'm not going to go back and fourth on this Kobe vs Manu. The goal was to point out that most posters were are not inconsistent. If you want to dig into Manu vs Kobe go through the RAPM data. I've already posted a perfectly good link, you can see the impact data for yourself.

We also covered the finals MVP not being useful, that applies in general to all awards. Though defensive awards are unquestionably the worst of the worst in terms of the media being to properly assign the correct players. But again, I already covered why I don't use media awards in general. They give you a good view of how the media saw the league at the time. That's not meaningless, but I wouldn't judge two players based on awards.

And...you just went with the Skip "choke" crap. Not even worth continuing to discuss basketball with someone who resorts to childish language.

You are moving goalposts. You said Garnett had a higher peak and used Vorp to back you up. Then why I pointed out if he played with other talent his stats wouldn’t be as good and you used other stats to try and prove your point. Even using a stat that a bench player lead the league in. However Kobe Vorp in 08 was better than Kg which proves my point of his stats (Peak) wouldn’t be the same. You are biased and delusional and inconsistent. Done talking to you.

I've shown you MULTIPLE stats. When I used VORP here is what I said.

Now I don't really give a damn if you do or don't like VORP. It's just a quick and dirty way to show in a non biased way, why people disagree with you and can be CONSISTENT in their views. We have data to show that all 3 of these guys were consistent top 5 guys by this metric, but we see KG and Duncan both finishing first with Kobe peaking at 3rd. So we can also based on this start to build the case back for better peaks as I already addressed.

It is a QUICK and DIRTY method, that shows just an example of why one can take KG over Kobe for peak. You THEN wanted to get into a single season comparison. So I didn't provide you with a QUICK AND DIRTY analysis. I presented you with a list of multiple metrics to give you context for why that case could be made. You stated that KG wasn't even in the conversation at the time, so I used MVP voting to point out that KG had numerous media votes to show that it was a CONVERSATION at the time. I then gave you a multiple page breakdown from dozens of posters from 2010 to show you in that time frame a detailed breakdown and debate among dozens of people on who was the best player in 2008 so you could see multiple view points, detailed stats, detailed GAME based breakdown, and more information than I could possibly write up myself.

Effectively, I provided you with pages upon pages upon pages of information on why KG can be seen as the best player from 2008.

You somehow with me providing you with all of that are now coming back and flat out lying about me using VORP and nothing else? A stat I opened with by stating it was just a quick and dirty metric to give you a quick snap shot for context. You took me flat out telling you that I wouldn't use it exclusively and are now trying to claim I did so. Do you see how absurd that is?

You're clearly upset that your attempt to insult the integrity of posters here as turned into you trying to argue for Kobe while I'm not even trying to get into this debate. I'm just sticking to why people can be consistent and rank kobe lower.

[Joao Saraiva]

Well I don't have Curry above Kobe myself, I have Curry slight outside top 10 and Kobe at #10.

With that said I got a few things to say to op.

First the LeBron vs Kobe... I know it's a thing among casuals and facebook people or something. In reality that discussion is no longer there. LeBron has more accodales - 3 MVPs and 2 FMVPs. LeBron is the most efficient scorer, the better rebounder, the better playmaker... dude is more versatile, closed the middle of the defense in his prime to win championships without a big man...

Kobe is left with man to man defense and being the more explosive as a scorer... but those explosions came in the RS. Not really in the playoffs, LeBron has actually that one too. Longevity says LeBron. Advanced stats say Bron. RAPM says Bron.

Ring counting? Well... yeah. 5 to 4. The gap is not enough.

Now the rings of Steph... Well, Steph has 1 FMVP but let's be honest, if Bron wasn't winning in 15 cause he wasn't on the winning team, Curry should have been FMVP. When he and KD played together, and I'm not making a long line here, Curry was the focal point, the biggest catalyst of the Warriors. Yes KD was great, yes he deserved FMVP. That doesn't say he was the best player - just like Pierce wasn't better than KG in 08. Kobe was not the LAkers' best player from 00 to 02 tough, it's very hard to argue him against peak/prime Shaq.


OBviously those 3 rings add value to Kobe's career, specially 01 when he had a brutal campaign going to the NBA finals. I'm not a believer most top SGs could replace him, but he's more replaceable than Bron or Curry at their titles.

To end it... you put numbers and the numbers say LBJ is better. Not by a biiiiiig margin. OBviously. IF Kobe is in the discussion for top 10 ALL TIME he had to be a tremendous player. It's not a bash being in #10, #12 or #13. Think abuot it. Among the best of the best.

And the margins between those players will never be very big, but there comes a point where making a solid argument is tremendously difficult, and that is what Kobe doesn't have on LeBron.

[flytimes11]

I'm not going to go back and fourth on this Kobe vs Manu. The goal was to point out that most posters were are not inconsistent. If you want to dig into Manu vs Kobe go through the RAPM data. I've already posted a perfectly good link, you can see the impact data for yourself.

We also covered the finals MVP not being useful, that applies in general to all awards. Though defensive awards are unquestionably the worst of the worst in terms of the media being to properly assign the correct players. But again, I already covered why I don't use media awards in general. They give you a good view of how the media saw the league at the time. That's not meaningless, but I wouldn't judge two players based on awards.

And...you just went with the Skip "choke" crap. Not even worth continuing to discuss basketball with someone who resorts to childish language.

You are moving goalposts. You said Garnett had a higher peak and used Vorp to back you up. Then why I pointed out if he played with other talent his stats wouldn’t be as good and you used other stats to try and prove your point. Even using a stat that a bench player lead the league in. However Kobe Vorp in 08 was better than Kg which proves my point of his stats (Peak) wouldn’t be the same. You are biased and delusional and inconsistent. Done talking to you.

I've shown you MULTIPLE stats. When I used VORP here is what I said.

Now I don't really give a damn if you do or don't like VORP. It's just a quick and dirty way to show in a non biased way, why people disagree with you and can be CONSISTENT in their views. We have data to show that all 3 of these guys were consistent top 5 guys by this metric, but we see KG and Duncan both finishing first with Kobe peaking at 3rd. So we can also based on this start to build the case back for better peaks as I already addressed.

It is a QUICK and DIRTY method, that shows just an example of why one can take KG over Kobe for peak. You THEN wanted to get into a single season comparison. So I didn't provide you with a QUICK AND DIRTY analysis. I presented you with a list of multiple metrics to give you context for why that case could be made. You stated that KG wasn't even in the conversation at the time, so I used MVP voting to point out that KG had numerous media votes to show that it was a CONVERSATION at the time. I then gave you a multiple page breakdown from dozens of posters from 2010 to show you in that time frame a detailed breakdown and debate among dozens of people on who was the best player in 2008 so you could see multiple view points, detailed stats, detailed GAME based breakdown, and more information than I could possibly write up myself.

Effectively, I provided you with pages upon pages upon pages of information on why KG can be seen as the best player from 2008.

You somehow with me providing you with all of that are now coming back and flat out lying about me using VORP and nothing else? A stat I opened with by stating it was just a quick and dirty metric to give you a quick snap shot for context. You took me flat out telling you that I wouldn't use it exclusively and are now trying to claim I did so. Do you see how absurd that is?

You're clearly upset that your attempt to insult the integrity of posters here as turned into you trying to argue for Kobe while I'm not even trying to get into this debate. I'm just sticking to why people can be consistent and rank kobe lower.

You brought up 08. You are inconsistent. I stopped taking you serious soon as you said Manu was same level as Kobe. You are cherry-picking stats and not taking the real world into consideration. Nobody is upset. You are proving my point and the link you provided didn’t even work. Any metric that paints manu as best in the league is flawed. He wasn’t even best on his own team. When you were arguing PEAKS you kept using Vorp not much else. Then you bringing up how going from a 32-50 team to the number 1 team in the east with multiple all stars raising KGs advanced stats is crazy, of course that would happen. Paul Pierce led the entire league in plus/minus in 08.I’m done talking with you. The irony is you are the biased one not me.

[flytimes11]

Well I don't have Curry above Kobe myself, I have Curry slight outside top 10 and Kobe at #10.

With that said I got a few things to say to op.

First the LeBron vs Kobe... I know it's a thing among casuals and facebook people or something. In reality that discussion is no longer there. LeBron has more accodales - 3 MVPs and 2 FMVPs. LeBron is the most efficient scorer, the better rebounder, the better playmaker... dude is more versatile, closed the middle of the defense in his prime to win championships without a big man...

Kobe is left with man to man defense and being the more explosive as a scorer... but those explosions came in the RS. Not really in the playoffs, LeBron has actually that one too. Longevity says LeBron. Advanced stats say Bron. RAPM says Bron.

Ring counting? Well... yeah. 5 to 4. The gap is not enough.

Now the rings of Steph... Well, Steph has 1 FMVP but let's be honest, if Bron wasn't winning in 15 cause he wasn't on the winning team, Curry should have been FMVP. When he and KD played together, and I'm not making a long line here, Curry was the focal point, the biggest catalyst of the Warriors. Yes KD was great, yes he deserved FMVP. That doesn't say he was the best player - just like Pierce wasn't better than KG in 08. Kobe was not the LAkers' best player from 00 to 02 tough, it's very hard to argue him against peak/prime Shaq.


OBviously those 3 rings add value to Kobe's career, specially 01 when he had a brutal campaign going to the NBA finals. I'm not a believer most top SGs could replace him, but he's more replaceable than Bron or Curry at their titles.

To end it... you put numbers and the numbers say LBJ is better. Not by a biiiiiig margin. OBviously. IF Kobe is in the discussion for top 10 ALL TIME he had to be a tremendous player. It's not a bash being in #10, #12 or #13. Think abuot it. Among the best of the best.

And the margins between those players will never be very big, but there comes a point where making a solid argument is tremendously difficult, and that is what Kobe doesn't have on LeBron.

I said in the OP I have no problem with anybody saying Lebron > Kobe. I said my problem is when people say they don’t belong in the same conversation.

What championships did Lebron win without a big man? And again Lebron definitely has more big playoff games but he always played weaker competition in the east. As far as being more replaceable, that’s hypothetical and we truly would never know so I don’t get into that too much. But the only players I for sure am comfortable with above Kobe are Lbj, Jordan, Kareem, everyone else I feel like Kobe has a legit argument over them but you’ll never here me say it’s not a conversation or no question like the people on realgm do because that’s crazy to me.

[Joao Saraiva]

Well I don't have Curry above Kobe myself, I have Curry slight outside top 10 and Kobe at #10.

With that said I got a few things to say to op.

First the LeBron vs Kobe... I know it's a thing among casuals and facebook people or something. In reality that discussion is no longer there. LeBron has more accodales - 3 MVPs and 2 FMVPs. LeBron is the most efficient scorer, the better rebounder, the better playmaker... dude is more versatile, closed the middle of the defense in his prime to win championships without a big man...

Kobe is left with man to man defense and being the more explosive as a scorer... but those explosions came in the RS. Not really in the playoffs, LeBron has actually that one too. Longevity says LeBron. Advanced stats say Bron. RAPM says Bron.

Ring counting? Well... yeah. 5 to 4. The gap is not enough.

Now the rings of Steph... Well, Steph has 1 FMVP but let's be honest, if Bron wasn't winning in 15 cause he wasn't on the winning team, Curry should have been FMVP. When he and KD played together, and I'm not making a long line here, Curry was the focal point, the biggest catalyst of the Warriors. Yes KD was great, yes he deserved FMVP. That doesn't say he was the best player - just like Pierce wasn't better than KG in 08. Kobe was not the LAkers' best player from 00 to 02 tough, it's very hard to argue him against peak/prime Shaq.


OBviously those 3 rings add value to Kobe's career, specially 01 when he had a brutal campaign going to the NBA finals. I'm not a believer most top SGs could replace him, but he's more replaceable than Bron or Curry at their titles.

To end it... you put numbers and the numbers say LBJ is better. Not by a biiiiiig margin. OBviously. IF Kobe is in the discussion for top 10 ALL TIME he had to be a tremendous player. It's not a bash being in #10, #12 or #13. Think abuot it. Among the best of the best.

And the margins between those players will never be very big, but there comes a point where making a solid argument is tremendously difficult, and that is what Kobe doesn't have on LeBron.

I said in the OP I have no problem with anybody saying Lebron > Kobe. I said my problem is when people say they don’t belong in the same conversation.

What championships did Lebron win without a big man? And again Lebron definitely has more big playoff games but he always played weaker competition in the east. As far as being more replaceable, that’s hypothetical and we truly would never know so I don’t get into that too much. But the only players I for sure am comfortable with above Kobe are Lbj, Jordan, Kareem, everyone else I feel like Kobe has a legit argument over them but you’ll never here me say it’s not a conversation or no question like the people on realgm do because that’s crazy to me.

Without a defensive big - 2012, 2013 and in 2016 he was asked to do the big man job of closing the middle of the defense. The Heat went small without Joel and LeBron always had the job of being the primary closer of the middle. He's not the only SF to have done it, but to win a ring yes he is. I don't think he's better than AK47 in that regard, but he did it well enough when the stakes were tremendously high while being the #1 offensive option. That's something. In 16 you can argue Cleveland played with Thompson, but it was Bron on Barnes who allowed Cleveland to run defense that way.

I don't buy the much weaker competition in the East. Also think about this... when Kobe went further in the West the Lakers were stacked. Bron took the 18 Cavs to the finals, beat the Pistons in 07 with garbage squads... in some years the East was good or he had difficult runs - 07, 11, 12, 15 and 18 were all difficult runs to the finals. The bottom teams of the East were not good, but the top ones definitely had arguments against anyone in the West most of the time. I might even add circumstance to the table - injuries on Bosh in 12, Kyrie and Love in 15.

Well I feel Kobe hasn't much of a case against MJ and LeBron. You might want to say his era is the most difficult ever and so to put him in conversation with anyone else. Without that, Kobe has no case vs Bill Russell, KAJ and even Wilt (for me). Then he has a case... but it might not be the most solid case ever. It's up for discussion obviously.

Then again you put him vs Magic... it's a hard case for Kobe, don't you think?

[Trey24]

I did not get to see Michael in his prime as I was too young. Watched plenty of tape and have been on same court as MJ in my life.

With that being said, Kobe is the best I personally have ever witnessed.

His shot selection is absolutely NEVER taken into consideration when people are talking about "advanced stats" which do not always tell the full picture.

I have Kobe over Lebron from a peak standpoint but I can't argue against Lebron's lack of injuries through his career, which has no doubt aided his longevity.

Imagine if LeBron had actually worked on his jumper before 2011 offseason. He would have been the GOAT.

[dhsilv2]

You are moving goalposts. You said Garnett had a higher peak and used Vorp to back you up. Then why I pointed out if he played with other talent his stats wouldn’t be as good and you used other stats to try and prove your point. Even using a stat that a bench player lead the league in. However Kobe Vorp in 08 was better than Kg which proves my point of his stats (Peak) wouldn’t be the same. You are biased and delusional and inconsistent. Done talking to you.

I've shown you MULTIPLE stats. When I used VORP here is what I said.

Now I don't really give a damn if you do or don't like VORP. It's just a quick and dirty way to show in a non biased way, why people disagree with you and can be CONSISTENT in their views. We have data to show that all 3 of these guys were consistent top 5 guys by this metric, but we see KG and Duncan both finishing first with Kobe peaking at 3rd. So we can also based on this start to build the case back for better peaks as I already addressed.

It is a QUICK and DIRTY method, that shows just an example of why one can take KG over Kobe for peak. You THEN wanted to get into a single season comparison. So I didn't provide you with a QUICK AND DIRTY analysis. I presented you with a list of multiple metrics to give you context for why that case could be made. You stated that KG wasn't even in the conversation at the time, so I used MVP voting to point out that KG had numerous media votes to show that it was a CONVERSATION at the time. I then gave you a multiple page breakdown from dozens of posters from 2010 to show you in that time frame a detailed breakdown and debate among dozens of people on who was the best player in 2008 so you could see multiple view points, detailed stats, detailed GAME based breakdown, and more information than I could possibly write up myself.

Effectively, I provided you with pages upon pages upon pages of information on why KG can be seen as the best player from 2008.

You somehow with me providing you with all of that are now coming back and flat out lying about me using VORP and nothing else? A stat I opened with by stating it was just a quick and dirty metric to give you a quick snap shot for context. You took me flat out telling you that I wouldn't use it exclusively and are now trying to claim I did so. Do you see how absurd that is?

You're clearly upset that your attempt to insult the integrity of posters here as turned into you trying to argue for Kobe while I'm not even trying to get into this debate. I'm just sticking to why people can be consistent and rank kobe lower.

You brought up 08. You are inconsistent. I stopped taking you serious soon as you said Manu was same level as Kobe. You are cherry-picking stats and not taking the real world into consideration. Nobody is upset. You are proving my point and the link you provided didn’t even work. Any metric that paints manu as best in the league is flawed. He wasn’t even best on his own team. When you were arguing PEAKS you kept using Vorp not much else. Then you bringing up how going from a 32-50 team to the number 1 team in the east with multiple all stars raising KGs advanced stats is crazy, of course that would happen. Paul Pierce led the entire league in plus/minus in 08.I’m done talking with you. The irony is you are the biased one not me.

Just wild someone questions Manu and Kobe being of equal value per minute.

But to correct you.

1. I showed CORP and VORP, two completely different metrics. Remember all those graphs? That wasn't VORP!
2. I didn't say i was going to make a complete argument for KG. I was explaining how one CAN do so and be consistent with Curry and KG.
3. YOU were the one that stated KG's points per game went down in 2008 and thus his advanced stats wouldn't have been as good had he always played with other allstars. Which I showed you was wrong...because it was.

[flytimes11]

Well I don't have Curry above Kobe myself, I have Curry slight outside top 10 and Kobe at #10.

With that said I got a few things to say to op.

First the LeBron vs Kobe... I know it's a thing among casuals and facebook people or something. In reality that discussion is no longer there. LeBron has more accodales - 3 MVPs and 2 FMVPs. LeBron is the most efficient scorer, the better rebounder, the better playmaker... dude is more versatile, closed the middle of the defense in his prime to win championships without a big man...

Kobe is left with man to man defense and being the more explosive as a scorer... but those explosions came in the RS. Not really in the playoffs, LeBron has actually that one too. Longevity says LeBron. Advanced stats say Bron. RAPM says Bron.

Ring counting? Well... yeah. 5 to 4. The gap is not enough.

Now the rings of Steph... Well, Steph has 1 FMVP but let's be honest, if Bron wasn't winning in 15 cause he wasn't on the winning team, Curry should have been FMVP. When he and KD played together, and I'm not making a long line here, Curry was the focal point, the biggest catalyst of the Warriors. Yes KD was great, yes he deserved FMVP. That doesn't say he was the best player - just like Pierce wasn't better than KG in 08. Kobe was not the LAkers' best player from 00 to 02 tough, it's very hard to argue him against peak/prime Shaq.


OBviously those 3 rings add value to Kobe's career, specially 01 when he had a brutal campaign going to the NBA finals. I'm not a believer most top SGs could replace him, but he's more replaceable than Bron or Curry at their titles.

To end it... you put numbers and the numbers say LBJ is better. Not by a biiiiiig margin. OBviously. IF Kobe is in the discussion for top 10 ALL TIME he had to be a tremendous player. It's not a bash being in #10, #12 or #13. Think abuot it. Among the best of the best.

And the margins between those players will never be very big, but there comes a point where making a solid argument is tremendously difficult, and that is what Kobe doesn't have on LeBron.

I said in the OP I have no problem with anybody saying Lebron > Kobe. I said my problem is when people say they don’t belong in the same conversation.

What championships did Lebron win without a big man? And again Lebron definitely has more big playoff games but he always played weaker competition in the east. As far as being more replaceable, that’s hypothetical and we truly would never know so I don’t get into that too much. But the only players I for sure am comfortable with above Kobe are Lbj, Jordan, Kareem, everyone else I feel like Kobe has a legit argument over them but you’ll never here me say it’s not a conversation or no question like the people on realgm do because that’s crazy to me.

Without a defensive big - 2012, 2013 and in 2016 he was asked to do the big man job of closing the middle of the defense. The Heat went small without Joel and LeBron always had the job of being the primary closer of the middle. He's not the only SF to have done it, but to win a ring yes he is. I don't think he's better than AK47 in that regard, but he did it well enough when the stakes were tremendously high while being the #1 offensive option. That's something. In 16 you can argue Cleveland played with Thompson, but it was Bron on Barnes who allowed Cleveland to run defense that way.

I don't buy the much weaker competition in the East. Also think about this... when Kobe went further in the West the Lakers were stacked. Bron took the 18 Cavs to the finals, beat the Pistons in 07 with garbage squads... in some years the East was good or he had difficult runs - 07, 11, 12, 15 and 18 were all difficult runs to the finals. The bottom teams of the East were not good, but the top ones definitely had arguments against anyone in the West most of the time. I might even add circumstance to the table - injuries on Bosh in 12, Kyrie and Love in 15.

Well I feel Kobe hasn't much of a case against MJ and LeBron. You might want to say his era is the most difficult ever and so to put him in conversation with anyone else. Without that, Kobe has no case vs Bill Russell, KAJ and even Wilt (for me). Then he has a case... but it might not be the most solid case ever. It's up for discussion obviously.

Then again you put him vs Magic... it's a hard case for Kobe, don't you think?

The heat still had bosh and I mean he had all star bigs those years. Bron is 6’8 250 and probably most athletic ever, so yea he was more versatile and capable of guarding bigs, I don’t think many guards could do that. In 2018 he beat indy, toronto (Derozan and Lowry were never title contenders), and a Boston team missing its two best players. The pistons team he beat in 07 won 50 games and no Ben Wallace. He beat two 41-41 teams to get to the conference finals, lastly he was swept in the finals. Impressive none the less. Magic doesn’t get any flack for playing with KAJ. Also it’s kinda hard to compare the modern game to when the game was in its infancy. So much has changed since then. Russell shouldn’t even be mentioned in top 10 list that include modern players IMO.

[dhsilv2]

His shot selection is absolutely NEVER taken into consideration when people are talking about "advanced stats" which do not always tell the full picture.

'I think the stats are VERY clearly taking his shot selection into account which is why his stats aren't better. They reflect that he had very poor shot selection.

[Trey24]

His shot selection is absolutely NEVER taken into consideration when people are talking about "advanced stats" which do not always tell the full picture.

'I think the stats are VERY clearly taking his shot selection into account which is why his stats aren't better. They reflect that he had very poor shot selection.

You just proved my point lol. You know Kobe was the most difficult shot maker of all time and people use it against him

[dhsilv2]

His shot selection is absolutely NEVER taken into consideration when people are talking about "advanced stats" which do not always tell the full picture.

'I think the stats are VERY clearly taking his shot selection into account which is why his stats aren't better. They reflect that he had very poor shot selection.

You just proved my point lol. You know Kobe was the most difficult shot maker of all time and people use it against him

Why wouldn't they? It's a great thing to be ABLE to make those shots. It's not a good thing if you take them when there are better shots available which was the issue and why the metrics don't shine on kobe as brightly as many of his biggest fans would like them too.

[flytimes11]

'I think the stats are VERY clearly taking his shot selection into account which is why his stats aren't better. They reflect that he had very poor shot selection.

You just proved my point lol. You know Kobe was the most difficult shot maker of all time and people use it against him

Why wouldn't they? It's a great thing to be ABLE to make those shots. It's not a good thing if you take them when there are better shots available which was the issue and why the metrics don't shine on kobe as brightly as many of his biggest fans would like them too.

Well when you are the only perimeter player on your team capable of generating offense that tends to happen. And despite his bad shot selection he won just as much as Ginobili and his spurs

[flytimes11]

His shot selection is absolutely NEVER taken into consideration when people are talking about "advanced stats" which do not always tell the full picture.

'I think the stats are VERY clearly taking his shot selection into account which is why his stats aren't better. They reflect that he had very poor shot selection.

You just proved my point lol. You know Kobe was the most difficult shot maker of all time and people use it against him

Two points isn’t two points . Folks around here act like the game is simulated on a computer.

[dhsilv2]

'I think the stats are VERY clearly taking his shot selection into account which is why his stats aren't better. They reflect that he had very poor shot selection.

You just proved my point lol. You know Kobe was the most difficult shot maker of all time and people use it against him

Two points isn’t two points . Folks around here act like the game is simulated on a computer.

No, actually 2 points IS 2 points. You don't get style points for making some insane fade away jumper over 2 defenders vs a simple catch and shoot 15 footer on the baseline. But you'll make way more 15 footer catch and shoot baseline jumpers than the fade away...

[dhsilv2]

You just proved my point lol. You know Kobe was the most difficult shot maker of all time and people use it against him

Why wouldn't they? It's a great thing to be ABLE to make those shots. It's not a good thing if you take them when there are better shots available which was the issue and why the metrics don't shine on kobe as brightly as many of his biggest fans would like them too.

Well when you are the only perimeter player on your team capable of generating offense that tends to happen. And despite his bad shot selection he won just as much as Ginobili and his spurs

What? Kobe took bad shots. Not because he had too, but because that was just Kobe's mentality. It made for great TV. it's why all these kids throw paper balls into a trash cans yelling kobe. And it's why he wasn't as good a player as he could have been if he'd had better shot selection and made better decisions over his career. Lebron isn't close to the shooter or shot creator that Kobe was. But he's a better scorer and distributor despite that. That comes down to simply making better decisions (well and being twice as strong, taller, and having larger hands...but welcome to basketball).

[flytimes11]

You just proved my point lol. You know Kobe was the most difficult shot maker of all time and people use it against him

Two points isn’t two points . Folks around here act like the game is simulated on a computer.

No, actually 2 points IS 2 points. You don't get style points for making some insane fade away jumper over 2 defenders vs a simple catch and shoot 15 footer on the baseline. But you'll make way more 15 footer catch and shoot baseline jumpers than the fade away...

Lol @ style points. Insane fadeaway jumper, which, on the stat sheet(your best friend), is two points.

But it could mean a lot more. These two points may alter the way a defense plays, opening it up later on or setting up their defense for a lower chance of a fast break.

It may also affect the psychology of it. Forcing a player into a fadeaway jumper is the ideal thing a defense should do. It's a low percentage shot. But if Kobe can make it - it is demoralizing. It basically says that even with the best defense around, I can still break you, then you're screwed. Your bias doesn’t allow for you to realize this. You keep acting like games are simulated and that citing advanced stats make you an expert.

[flytimes11]

Why wouldn't they? It's a great thing to be ABLE to make those shots. It's not a good thing if you take them when there are better shots available which was the issue and why the metrics don't shine on kobe as brightly as many of his biggest fans would like them too.

Well when you are the only perimeter player on your team capable of generating offense that tends to happen. And despite his bad shot selection he won just as much as Ginobili and his spurs

What? Kobe took bad shots. Not because he had too, but because that was just Kobe's mentality. It made for great TV. it's why all these kids throw paper balls into a trash cans yelling kobe. And it's why he wasn't as good a player as he could have been if he'd had better shot selection and made better decisions over his career. Lebron isn't closer to the shooter or shot creator that Kobe was. But he's a better scorer and distributor despite that. That comes down to simply making better decisions (well and being twice as strong, taller, and having larger hands...but welcome to basketball).

The lakers were reliant on Kobe’s mentality. It’s what won them games. Kobe couldn’t kick the ball to ariza or Odom or fisher or fox and expect them to break down the defense or create for others or get their own shot. He also didn’t have the luxury of overpowering his opponent similar to Lebron (not holding that against Lebron, just true). So the result was some tough shots but he showed he could win this way which is why I feel the “advanced stats” are overrated. Nba is series based he showed he could win series with this playstyle.

[dhsilv2]

Two points isn’t two points . Folks around here act like the game is simulated on a computer.

No, actually 2 points IS 2 points. You don't get style points for making some insane fade away jumper over 2 defenders vs a simple catch and shoot 15 footer on the baseline. But you'll make way more 15 footer catch and shoot baseline jumpers than the fade away...

Lol @ style points. Insane fadeaway jumper, which, on the stat sheet(your best friend), is two points.

But it could mean a lot more. These two points may alter the way a defense plays, opening it up later on or setting up their defense for a lower chance of a fast break.

It may also affect the psychology of it. Forcing a player into a fadeaway jumper is the ideal thing a defense should do. It's a low percentage shot. But if Kobe can make it - it is demoralizing. It basically says that even with the best defense around, I can still break you, then you're screwed. Your bias doesn’t allow for you to realize this. You keep acting like games are simulated and that citing advanced stats make you an expert.

Why don't we try this a different way.

Give me the 15 top 10 players in your mind. Yes, give me 15 guys who all could be in the top 10 according to you.