Where do you rank Kobe all-time? (poll)

[rrravenred]

Got him at #10. The gigantic Kobe-hating monster in me wants to put KG in front of him, but I can't find a legit reason to do it.

You just haven't spent enough time browsing the PC board.

There are legitimate (though highly contestable) arguments for it, but it's tough work.

[TheRobin]

Kobe was never the best player in the league" is sig worthy. Yet somehow there was a solid 3 year stretch where EVERYONE league-wide acknowledged Kobe as the consensus best player in the league. Strange huh? I suppose all of those players, coaches, analysts, and front office personnel are simply misinformed and unreliable right?

When was this 3 year period?

Lifetime achievement my ass. 28/6/5 efficiently, playing all 82 games, 57 wins and led his team to the Finals. You're just salty that he defeated the Spurs handily that year en route to the Finals. It was well deserved and you know it.

Is it better than 21/4/11.5 and 2.7 steals even more efficiently playing 80 games and 56 wins? By a third year player?
Or 19/3/9/ in reduced minutes with goat defensive impact and 66 wins?

He didn't deserve that MVP after he was gifted Pau Gasol.

I find it strange that you recognize KG as a legitimate candidate yet blind yourself to the drive, the willpower and the intensity that is...Kobe Bryant. In my opinion, KG's intensity, intangibles and defensive mindset were the most impactful attributes he brought to the team. His on court production was great, but they weren't MVP numbers...and yet he had an MVP-type impact on his team.

Its crazy how a team can win 10 more games than the MVP's team... It was Kobes last chance to win one so he got it.

It's a shame that so few people on here recognize just how great Kobe is. I suppose he's overrated within the media, but when he retires I think we'll start to realize just how great he is. We take the determination, the drive, the incredible focus, playing through injuries, the advanced skillset, the ability to often will the ball into the basket and make the impossible possible, for granted. Kobe is greatness personified...

You can have drive, focus, skillset, but all that doesn't make up for his play which leaves much to be desired..

Jordan
Russell
Magic
Kareem
Wilt
Duncan
Shaq
LeBron
Hakeem
Bird
Kobe

He has no case over any of these players.

[emotional]

"his play which leaves much to be desired" like the guy hasn't won 5 championships
"He has no case" looks at Lebron, Hakeem, Bird, Duncan and Shaq
and yes Kobe was the best player from 06-09

[Lost92Bricks]

8-10.

[TheRobin]

"his play which leaves much to be desired" like the guy hasn't won 5 championships
"He has no case" looks at Lebron, Hakeem, Bird, Duncan and Shaq
and yes Kobe was the best player from 06-09

He won 5 while being surrounded with the best talent in the league.. He's great, but he doesn't compare to anybody in the top ten.

LeBron, Hakeem, Duncan, Bird, Shaq have had over 5 seasons better than Kobe's best season. They've lead teams to the promise land as the Alpha dog and are goat performers when they're backs are against the wall. They all have higher BBIQs than Kobe and have been the undisputed best players in the NBA at one point of time minus maybe Bird

lol Wade, Dirk, Duncan, LeBron, Chris, Nash, Paul all had cases over him over those years and Lebron definitely did in 2009.

[emotional]

"He won 5 while being surrounded with the best talent in the league"

What champion didn't? Oh wait I get it, another exception made only to Kobe as to create a distorted narrative

"5 seasons better" only if you think stats are the only measure of "best" and not savvy enough to interpret other factors

"They've lead teams to the promise land as the Alpha dog and are goat performers when they're backs are against the wall. They all have higher BBIQs than Kobe"

I respect your opinion but you should state that it is your subjective opinion and not act in absolutes. I for example could mention 2007, 2009, 2010 and 2011 Lebron as proof of the absurdity of your argument. I could present Orlando Shaq as proof against it. Lets not forget 06 and 07 Dirk. Kobe spent a few years without top level talent and Phil. Duncan has always had Pop, Tony and Ginobili.


All of those guys you listed had a great year or two but not consistently, Kobe has claim for number 1 or number 2 for each of those years listed. Not saying no one else has claim for 06-09 but definitely has an impressive case for that time frame.

[Durins Baynes]

Kobe won 57 games on a team that was better than Paul's 56 win Hornets, and substantially better than Lebron's Cavs (who were 0-7 in the games Lebron missed), to say nothing of KG's effort on a 66 win team. The RPOY project looks to have a great deal of analysis on this, and in it Kobe wins zero years as best player.

[emotional]

Even if that were given (it's not, Realgm and the criteria put on a pedestal on this site are biased), if he were the second best player for all of those years then in aggregate he would be the best player for that time frame, since no one else maintained the top spot throughout.

[Durins Baynes]

I don't think so, KG for instance has a clear case ahead of him, I'd take Lebron without any 2nd thought as well. But then that just reveals your agenda, because you're picked an arbitrary period to claim he was "the best" during, not because he was actually the best player in any of those years, but if we average it out we is in that select period due to other guys having injuries, etc. Pretty meaningless claim. I could as easily say Danny Green was more valuable than Kobe last year, because when the playoffs came and things really mattered he was ready to deliver. Or I could say a player significantly worse than Kobe was better because Kobe missed the playoffs. It's wholly misleading as to whether Kobe was a worse player than that person though, and has nothing to do with an all-time list like this. For instance, add on the last year of Kobe's prime (2010) and his argument against Lebron becomes unsustainable. Start in 2005 instead of 2006, and the argument is also unsustainable. Or hey, just let me pick and choose 4 years out of some guys career, and match them against 4 years of Kobe- he can lose that to a lot of guys too.

At the end of the day Kobe was never the best player in any given year, and his longevity is not special either. Certainly not enough to overcome the clear disparity in peak to peak (or prime to prime) impact.

[Asianiac_24]

Too many posts to reply so I'll just do this one.

When was this 3 year period?

2006-2008, where Kobe was considered quite easily the best player in the league in all 3 years?

Is it better than 21/4/11.5 and 2.7 steals even more efficiently playing 80 games and 56 wins? By a third year player?
Or 19/3/9/ in reduced minutes with goat defensive impact and 66 wins?
He didn't deserve that MVP after he was gifted Pau Gasol.

I'd say so because
1) Kobe only had Gasol for half of the season, whereas Paul had Chandler and West for the whole season.
2) 56 wins is still less than 57 wins, and he lost the game near the end of the season where it was the game considered as "the fight of MVPs and 1st seed".
3) Why would Paul being a 3rd year player matter at all?
4) The choice was further confirmed when the Lakers got farther than the Hornets and Kobe performed better than Paul against the Western teams in the playoffs.

On an extra note, you think any Grizzlies fan right now is regretting the Pau trade? Thank god you aren't the GM of the Grizzlies or you'd take Tyrus Thomas instead

Its crazy how a team can win 10 more games than the MVP's team... It was Kobes last chance to win one so he got it.

So was it KG or Paul that should of been the MVP? KG's team won more because, let me guess, he had Pierce/Allen and a team full of veterans. KG was essential to the team, but more so than Kobe and Paul? I don't think so.

You can have drive, focus, skillset, but all that doesn't make up for his play which leaves much to be desired..

Jordan
Russell
Magic
Kareem
Wilt
Duncan
Shaq
LeBron
Hakeem
Bird
Kobe

He has no case over any of these players.

I agree with most of the players listed, but he certainly has over Hakeem, LeBron, Bird, and to a lesser extent Bill Russell. LeBron would eventually surpass him easily though.

[Durins Baynes]

2006-2008, where Kobe was considered quite easily the best player in the league in all 3 years?

That's why he won the MVP all 3 of those years... oh wait. He was definitely in the top 2 all three years though right?

[emotional]

Yes because we all know MVP is strictly a function of who is the best player....

[Durins Baynes]

MVP voting certainly is one good indicator. There are others, one of which is to look at how a guy impacts his team. Kobe from 05-07 certainly gave us a good indication of how he carried a team, which was not even close to a top 10 peak, and in 08-10 nothing about that equation changed. Bird got put on a 29 win team as a rookie and turned them into the best team in the NBA. Lebron left the Cavs and (as expected) they collapsed to the worst team in the NBA. Duncan got a dud support cast in 02 and 03 and they were a 58 and 60 win team (and won a title against prime Shaq and Kobe). Meanwhile Kobe with a solid cast couldn't get the 2005 Lakers above 34 wins, and wasn't much better the next two (when the coaching improved, but the support cast got a little worse). It's pretty easy to see the impact (or lack thereof). It's enough to be a top 15 player, but not a top 10 one.

[richboy]

Kobe and Bird are not comparable for a few reasons. One being Bird was actually the dominate player of the league for a long stretch of time. That is just words though. Why that is so is what separates him from Kobe.

Kobe Bryant is a extreme high usage player with a decent superstar PER. PER and Usage are pretty connected with players. The higher there usage the higher there PER usually goes. For Kobe to have his career high PER season he needed a career high 38.7 usage. 8.5% higher than Larry Birds highest usage year. Yet he almost equals Kobe's career high PER.

One of the reasons why Kobe is overrated and Bird underrated is because your looking at one of the most productive none ball dominate players in league history in Bird. The type of player that everyone would love to play with. A player who actually made his teammates better. He didn't need the ball and was an all-time great passer when he did have it. While Kobe is the complete opposite. Kobe has irrational confidence and plays the game 1 way. That is high usage and often making the game very difficult for his teammates. He is simply one of the most difficult players in league history to play with. I heard someone say that Kobe plays every game like he is playing with scrubs. Which makes many of his teammates start playing like scrubs. That the other players on the team only exist to support him in his journey for greatness.

Kobe Bryant stats would suggest I should be comparable to Larry Bird. Unfortunately for him to create those stats he has to use so many possessions that every elite player that comes to the Lakers sees a drop in usage. It is pretty much the Kobe show. Will always be the Kobe show. I could team up Larry Bird with any great player or collection of players without any issues. Kobe Bryant will make someone as low maintenance as Pau Gasol want more touches.

At the same time he not nearly as productive in those possessions as you would hope. He has a strong superstar level production. Not all-time great production. Durant is having better years than Kobe has ever had. Melo last year had at least a top 5 Kobe year. Not bad but just not top 10 all-time worthy. Michael Jordan would retire if he had Kobe's best season as that being a sign that he was almost done. I could say that because he did.

[emotional]

"Meanwhile Kobe with a solid cast couldn't get the 2005 Lakers above 34 wins"

I can't take you serious. Not to mention Kobe didn't get to train in the offseason and was injured a large chunk of that season.

"Kobe from 05-07 certainly gave us a good indication of how he carried a team"

Nope. No more than Lebron pre-2012 or KG pre-Celtics or Jordan pre- Phil and Scottie were great indicators.

MVP is as much an indicator of best player as FMVP, championships, advanced Stats and subjective/ intangible factors. Your agenda drives which one you want to put on a pedestal.

Kobe won two of the three championships from 08-10, yeah not much changed there

Lebron's Cavs went south because they went into rebuild mode, not because they couldn't theoretically field a winning team.

Credit to Duncan but lets be honest, Threepeat fatigue and a historically bad East allowed Duncan and a decent supporting cast to win in 03. Modern day Hakeem narrative but if you want to play that up without context, big ups to you!

[microfib4thewin]

^Do you also penalize Kareem for that? (crying for a trade)

Kareem - Helped led the Bucks to a title and battled the Celtics to 7 games in their second Finals appearance before he publicly stated that he wants to leave Milwaukee.

Kobe - Blew up the whole team with his pathetic performance in 04, missed the freaking playoffs when he was desperate to clean his image and prove that he can win without Shaq and Phil, followed by two years of mediocrity even though Kobe is supposed to be this huge winner who can make any team good, then demanded a trade by first being taped with unflattering remarks on Bynum, accused this so called 'insider' for blaming him as the cause of Shaq's departure, called Jerry Buss a moron even though he let Kobe use his personal jet to attend the trial, and said Kupchak is an idiot in front of everyone. Not only that, but he has the balls to tell the Lakers he will only accept a trade to the Bulls and they cannot get Deng in return because Kobe wants to play with him. Not only is a guy with two years left on his contract being specific about which place he wants to get traded to, he's also telling his team that they cannot get the best player from the other team as part of the return.

But hey, since Kareem left and Kobe didn't it must mean Kareem is less loyal than Kobe, never mind that Kobe wasn't grinning from ear to ear until the Lakers got Gasol. Kareem's sin is asking to be traded from a place he didn't want to get drafted to in the first place. Kobe? He forced his way to LA by telling the Nets that he doesn't want to play in New Jersey, then after he mooched off Shaq for 3 rings he wanted to leave LA for another big market that has more potential. Ironically the Lakers wouldn't have been in such a sorry shape if Kobe didn't ruin everything in 04.

It would have been hilarious to see how Kobe deals with being in a small market. He would probably leave Milwaukee without blinking.

Got him at #10. The gigantic Kobe-hating monster in me wants to put KG in front of him, but I can't find a legit reason to do it.

While I have trouble putting KG above Kobe I do not think it's difficult to say that they're equals. Like Mutnt pointed out, KG and Kobe were drafted around the same time, and very often Kobe's first few years are written off because he wasn't at the top yet. What was frequently missed is that KG was already a legit allstar player during his early years whereas Kobe's allstar selection was rather questionable when he was still the sixth man on his team. Kobe didn't make the jump to superstardom until his fifth year in the league and his second year under Phil. KG made the jump at around the same time, but who did KG have for guidance? Kobe had the greatest coach who coached the GOAT and the second best SG in history as his mentors, and Kobe has admitted to seeking help from MJ. Who was KG going to ask about becoming an all around player and a defensive anchor, Kevin McHale?

Despite Kobe having much more resources to work with from 97-05 Kobe was only definitely better in 2001. Kobe's playoff run in 2002 was rather pedestrian and he didn't have a long playoff run in 2003 so I have a tough time putting Kobe clearly above KG for those two years. From 06-10, Kobe is the better player. To conclude, KG had six years where he's above Kobe, Kobe had six years where he is above KG, and two years that are neck to neck.

[Durins Baynes]

"Meanwhile Kobe with a solid cast couldn't get the 2005 Lakers above 34 wins"

I can't take you serious. Not to mention Kobe didn't get to train in the offseason and was injured a large chunk of that season.

1) The support cast Kobe had was definitely solid, at least compared to the guys he is being compared to here. He had Odom, who would easily be the best player on the support cast of the Spurs in 02-03, or the Cavs in 09 and 10, Caron Butler a well above average small forward, C.Atkins a run of the mill starting point guard, and Chris Mihm, a run of the mill role playing big. That isn't a dream starting 4 to play next to by any means, but it's definitely solid. Atkins went on to start on a Grizzlies team that was little better the following year, and they won 50 games despite numerous injuries.
2) The injury excuse doesn't fly, because the 2005 Lakers team went 28-38 when Kobe was playing, so it wasn't like it mattered much. That team was always going to crash and burn.
With guys like Bird, Dr J, Duncan, Kareem or Lebron we can see clear evidence of the huge impact they had in their primes, where they could take awful support casts to contention status on their own. Here's Kobe with a team that is solid-ish, and they can't even make the playoffs. Bird was basically worth 32 wins as a rookie. Was Kobe's Laker team in 2005 only a 2 win team without Kobe? Clearly not. Heck, we saw a less experienced Lamar Odom lead a worse support cast to 31 wins in 2001, so the idea Kobe was elevating this team significantly higher than they'd otherwise have been ranked in 2005 is pretty absurd on the face of it.

He did a little better in 2006 and 2007, but none of it really compares to the names he's being compared to here.

"Kobe from 05-07 certainly gave us a good indication of how he carried a team"

Nope. No more than Lebron pre-2012 or KG pre-Celtics or Jordan pre- Phil and Scottie were great indicators.

Weird reply. Pre-Celtics KG took worse support casts to 50 win seasons. Sure, KG also fell short of doing what those other guys I named could do, but he certainly did more than Kobe these 3 seasons, enough to show us he could do substantially better than Kobe could. Jordan's teams got great as soon as his talent did, and even when his talent wasn't the best the teams were still good. Still not seeing the comparison. The 88 Bulls won 50 games and made the 2nd round (losing against the uber stacked Pistons) when Scottie and Ho were only rookies, so clearly Jordan showed us he could lead a team without great talent to better results than Kobe.

Lebron's Cavs went south because they went into rebuild mode, not because they couldn't theoretically field a winning team.

Not accurate at all. The Cavs originally were trying to win games, and talked up how they could get a title before Lebron. They kept the same team sans Lebron (and minus some guys who had been a net neutral to the team winning, like Shaq), and even before the injuries kicked in the Cavs were just awful.

Credit to Duncan but lets be honest, Threepeat fatigue and a historically bad East allowed Duncan and a decent supporting cast to win in 03. Modern day Hakeem narrative but if you want to play that up without context, big ups to you!

3 peat fatigue is an astonishingly weak excuse, and the East in 00-02 was no weaker than in 03, so that excuse also doesn't fly. Nobody was talking that angle before the season, and when the playoffs rolled around everyone expected the Lakers to crush the Spurs. I think something like 1/15 writers for ESPN picked the Spurs to win the title that year. What Duncan did was miraculous.

[Asianiac_24]

Kobe and Bird are not comparable for a few reasons. One being Bird was actually the dominate player of the league for a long stretch of time. That is just words though. Why that is so is what separates him from Kobe.

Kobe Bryant is a extreme high usage player with a decent superstar PER. PER and Usage are pretty connected with players. The higher there usage the higher there PER usually goes. For Kobe to have his career high PER season he needed a career high 38.7 usage. 8.5% higher than Larry Birds highest usage year. Yet he almost equals Kobe's career high PER.

One of the reasons why Kobe is overrated and Bird underrated is because your looking at one of the most productive none ball dominate players in league history in Bird. The type of player that everyone would love to play with. A player who actually made his teammates better. He didn't need the ball and was an all-time great passer when he did have it. While Kobe is the complete opposite. Kobe has irrational confidence and plays the game 1 way. That is high usage and often making the game very difficult for his teammates. He is simply one of the most difficult players in league history to play with. I heard someone say that Kobe plays every game like he is playing with scrubs. Which makes many of his teammates start playing like scrubs. That the other players on the team only exist to support him in his journey for greatness.

Kobe Bryant stats would suggest I should be comparable to Larry Bird. Unfortunately for him to create those stats he has to use so many possessions that every elite player that comes to the Lakers sees a drop in usage. It is pretty much the Kobe show. Will always be the Kobe show. I could team up Larry Bird with any great player or collection of players without any issues. Kobe Bryant will make someone as low maintenance as Pau Gasol want more touches.

At the same time he not nearly as productive in those possessions as you would hope. He has a strong superstar level production. Not all-time great production. Durant is having better years than Kobe has ever had. Melo last year had at least a top 5 Kobe year. Not bad but just not top 10 all-time worthy. Michael Jordan would retire if he had Kobe's best season as that being a sign that he was almost done. I could say that because he did.

What a **** of garbage. One of those "Kobe is a ballhog he sucks" bull again. Several players have had career years with Kobe, including Gasol, Odom, Turiaf, Ariza, Smush, Sasha, etc. Their FG% pretty much all increased playing with Kobe. The fact that he has 5 rings and is one of the most successful players in this era suggests that his way is good. Kobe has had some problems with great players no doubt (Shaq being the prime example), but it never transpired on the court. Not to mention Shaq himself has had problems with a lot more great players than Kobe.

Most people have Kobe around 9-15, with RealGM putting him at around #10, which is just about right IMO. I fail to see how Kobe is overrated.

[therealbig3]

I won't put it in order, since that might just lead to OT discussions and disagreements, so the players I rank ahead of Kobe in no order:

Shaquille O'Neal
Michael Jordan
Tim Duncan
Bill Russell
Kevin Garnett
Hakeem Olajuwon
Larry Bird
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Julius Erving
Wilt Chamberlain
Magic Johnson
LeBron James

So I rank Kobe 13th.

[aol4532]

I think Kobe and KG is a very interesting comparison.. We can pretty much throw the 1st half of their careers out of the window, considering that Kobe played with prime Shaq and Phil and KG didn't. If you compare the 2nd half of their career where they have very similar casts, then they look very similar(down to young Rondo vs injured Bynum). The biggest difference is that KG had a season ending injury, which directly contributed to Kobe's 1st ring. Normally, this should be a big mark against KG, but then Kobe also got a season ending injury in 05. It just so happened that Kobe got injured when he had a weak cast, and KG when he had a strong cast. Despite that, if you switched Doc and Phil, the ring count would probably be 2-1, in KG's favor.