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

[BmanInBigD]

I got bored so I did a quick comparison.

Peak = best 4 years
Prime = best 10 years

Jordan
(30 PER) Peak : 34 / 7 / 7 on 58%TS .....271-WSP48
(29 PER) Prime : 34 / 6 / 6 on 58%TS .....258-WSP48
____________________________________________
Shaq
(29.5 PER) Peak : 29 / 15 / 3apg / 3bpg on 57%TS .....238-WSP48
(28.7 PER) Prime : 28 / 13 / 3apg / 2.3bpg on 57%TS .....212-WSP48
____________________________________________
Duncan
(27.4 PER) Peak : 25 / 14 / 4apg / 3bpg on 56%TS .....241-WSP48
(26.4 PER) Prime : 23 / 13 / 4apg / 3bpg on 55%TS .....214-WSP48
_________________________________________________________
Kobe
(25 PER) Peak : 30 / 6 / 5apg on 57%TS .....185-WSP48
(23 PER) Prime : 28 / 5 / 5apg on .55%TS .....171-WSP48
__________________________________________________________

Plus just for fun I will put Lebrons Prime.
It isn't 10 years like the others though because he has only made the playoffs 8 times in his career.

Lebron
(27.3 PER) Prime : 28 / 9 / 7apg on 57%TS .....238-WSP48

Don't you know it doesn't matter how you actually performed?? It's much more about how many rings you have, how many all-star game MVP's you have, and how clownish, attention-seeking analysts rate you.

[emotional]

Except the metrics he posted don't measure "how you actually performed".

[Durins Baynes]

How you actually performed measures how you actually performed. Like in 05-07 when Kobe showed he couldn't lead a non-stacked team anywhere, whereas all the top ten guys we're talking about (and some not in the top 10 too) showed they could- Duncan in 02 and 03, Lebron in 09 and 10, Bird in 80, Magic in 90 and 91, Dr J in 76, Kareem in his rookie year, etc. When given merely a decent support cast (and a decent coach) in 2005 Kobe couldn't do anything with it.

[emotional]

You mutilated the word decent but okay. You keep trying to hammer a point home that is not in my eyes in any way factual. No advanced stats are not a complete measurement of what a player has to offer to team basketball. Yes it tells a part of the story. No Lebron isn't better because he is an advanced stat warrior.

[Durins Baynes]

Mihm and Atkins were solid-ish role playing starters, while Butler was way above average for a starter, and Odom was a borderline all-star. That was Kobe's starting 5. He took them to 34 wins, and it wasn't because he was hurt (because the team was 28-38 when he was healthy), and it wasn't because Odom was hurt (because Odom got rested to close the season after the front office realised they weren't making the playoffs, since they were too far behind and had a horror schedule to close the season). It was just because Kobe wasn't as good as these guys. Heck, even Lamar Odom took a team that was no better to 31 wins in 2001. Kobe just couldn't carry a team in the same way as other top 10 players- the evidence is in, and he couldn't do it.

[emotional]

Mihms and Chucky Atkins were best suited as bench players, Odom was not at the level he was in 05 or during the 08-10 run, and you fail to mention that Kobe did not get to train properly due to the drama of 04. Also, Odom taking the Heat to 31 wins was a EC fallacy, same with Lebron's fabricated success 06-10.

[te887848]

No I said they were going into rebuild mode aka tanking and transitioning to a new era

Lebron has almost equaled Kobe in underachieving and in a shorter span. Give it another 8 years.

Funny thing is, Lebron required MORE talent than Kobe ever required to win as THE man on his team.

Lebron had 2 all stars(wade/Bosh)Kobe only had one(Gasol)

Matter of fact as a starter, Kobe has never played with 2 all stars at once. His entire prime(01-10) he played with 2(Shaq and Gasol) and never at the same time.

With The way People talk about Kobe's "talented teams" you would think he was playing with multiple all stars yearly like Lebron the last 3 years or bird/magic in the 80's

Kobe has never had close to LeBron's success with teams as bad as the Cavs of 2007, 2009, and 2010.

And during his 2009 and 2010 playoff runs he of course needed more help than LeBron. It wasn't Kobe who was leading a team with an injured 16/5/5 second option and a 12/7 big man who can't rebound to the title. That was LeBron. Kobe was relying on the most dominant frontcourt in basketball to own the interior for him with elite rebounding and defense. Heck, many argue that Kobe wasn't even clearly Gasol's superior in 2010. At least with LeBron there was never a discussion period as to who the best player on Miami was.

[Durins Baynes]

Mihm would be better as a bench player, but he was still a plausible enough starter. More plausible than starters Lebron or Duncan had in some of the runs I mentioned. Atkins started on a 50 win team the following year. He wasn't a great starter, obviously you'd prefer someone better, but he was still capable of starting. Odom in 05 was just as talented as he was later, and you're just revealing how little you know about Odom.
1) Odom didn't win 31 games on the Heat, he did it with the Clippers in 2001 as a 2nd year player. That year his team consisted of journeyman guard Jeff McInnis, Eric Piatkowski, Kandiman, the 19, 20 and 21 year old versions of Maggette, Q.Rich and D.Miles, etc. In other words a terrible team, who Odom led to 31 wins, while leading them in ppg, rpg, spg, bpg, and almost apg too.
2) Odom got a big contract offer in 2003 from the Heat based on how talented he'd shown he could be, and followed that up by making every Clipper fan curse Sterling for letting him go- he posted 17-10-4 for the Heat in 2004 as they made the playoffs, while playing the 4 (which critics claimed at the time he couldn't play). He developed more of a comfort zone with Kobe as time went on, and as the team became more stacked he was able to get better efficiency (because the D could focus on him less), but he was just as talented a player in 05 (and more athletic).
There are no excuses here. Kobe's performance in 2005 (and then 06 and 07) was a stunning contrast to what guys like Lebron did in 09 and 10, or Duncan in 02 and 03. Odom would have easily been the 2nd best player on any of those Cavs/Spurs teams.

[emotional]

Lebron won his championships with MORE talent than Kobe had for his three year window 08-10. Kobe never had the opportunity to do what Lebron did 07-10 because he only had a bad team for three years. Lebron had NINE years to eventually wait for the East to go from a really strong conference to pitiful. Even still his best lead him to second round exits and a thrashing by the Spurs, proving that the Pistons injured and old squad let the fluke Cavs to the finals by default.


No one outside of Realgm has EVER argued that Gasol was superior to Kobe. A couple dozen members on this site is statistically insignificant.

[Durins Baynes]

Not only is much of the above false, it's also irrelevant to my point.

Want to guess who both ESPN and Vegas had as the clear title faves in 2011 btw? Hint- it wasn't the Heat.

How many times do you need to be corrected about Lebron's Cavs records being due to a "weak East"? I mean, I think I've seen this corrected about 5 times in this thread already, what part of reading those replies are you having trouble with?

[emotional]

What is false?

Show me a pew poll where Kobe and Gasol are seen as equals.

Show me tons of media saying Gasol got shafted.

Show me the 9 years that Kobe got to be the man during youth/ prime.

Show me a season that was better than 07 for Lebron during his Cavs days, a season that most agree was a fluke and a result of others failures rather than some God like Lebron willing his team through the harsh EC.

[Durins Baynes]

Since I haven't said Gasol is better than Kobe I obviously won't be arguing that, but you seem to ignore most of the points I do make that contradict what you believe. For instance, you keep attributing Lebron's success to a weak Eastern Conference, yet in 09 and 10 their win record against the West was crushingly good- so obviously that argument doesn't hold up. I have seen the numbers presented to you over and over, yet you keep claiming (with no evidence) that he was aided by his weak conference. Your argument just seems dishonest, because you don't recognise inaccuracies that have been repeatedly pointed out (like claiming Odom carried his team to 31 wins "because of the weak East", when the Clippers played in the West). If I was wrong as often as you, I'd be less brazen in my claims.

[emotional]

I didn't say his successes were attributed to the EC, more so it would be mitigated by being in the West. He would not have won AS MANY MVPS and would have had slightly fewer advances in the playoffs.

Odom didn't carry the Clippers. I naturally assumed you meant the Heat since thats the only squad were the claims of Odom carrying anything could be made.

[Durins Baynes]

I said "in 2001", so the idea you confused the teams is dubious. More likely you didn't even know when Odom was playing for who. It's also very obvious Odom carried the Clippers that year, he led them in basically everything. There were only 3 guys on that team who averaged over 10ppg- Piatkowski (a poor mans Kyle Korver) with 10.6ppg, McInnis with 12.9, and Odom with 17.2. That team was destitute of talent, and looked to Odom for almost everything.

Your claims about Lebron are equally wrong- MVP's are a regular season award, and you've yet to provide any evidence whatever that Lebron unduly benefited from playing in the East during the regular season (or at all really), where his teams record against the West was awesome.

[microfib4thewin]

Uh...Pop has a LONG coaching/GM career that predates when he took over the Spurs. Do your research, almost as silly as when you said Odom and Kwame were on par with Wade and Bosh.

He did not become team president until Peter Holt purchased the Spurs in 1994. Before that he had four years of experience as an assistant coach in the NBA. The majority of his coaching experience is from the NCAA and he was only a head coach there for a division III team. To summarize, he had:

-A decade of NCAA coaching
-4 years as an NBA assistant coach
-1 year as an NBA head coach
-3 years as the president of operation for an NBA team

when Duncan got drafted. This is hardly a resume that every employer would gush over, and Pop has to learn the ropes as Duncan progresses. Even so, Duncan and D-Rob managed to win a title in their second year together despite both being 7 footers and Duncan deserves more credit than Pop for the Spurs first title.

[richboy]

lol ok and if Bynum isn't persistently injured in 08-10 they Threepeat

If Danny Granger, Derrick Rose, Rondo, and KG arent injured, the Heat don't win a title either,

Lakers have not shown they played better with Bynum. That Odom and Gasol was there best 4 and 5. That Gasol at PF didn't work consistently defensively. Phil Jackson didn't even buy in that they were better with Bynum.

Plus the argument is actually regarding KG vs Kobe. KG look well on his way to a potential repeat when he was out for the year. Then played the Lakers again on 1 leg. Not to mention lost Perkins for game 7. It is funny how a couple of injuries happen and suddenly Kobe suppose to be so much better than KG.

Bynum was essential to the Lakers success in 09-10. Sure the best lineup was Odom/Gasol, but one of the reasons why the Lakers were successful was because of the fact that they could always put out 2 of Odom/Gasol/Bynum on the floor .

Last time I checked the Lakers owned the Celtics in the 09 RS games, ending their 19 game win streak. I'm not saying that the Lakers would easily best the Celtics that year, but it wouldn't be easy for either team. Losing Perkins in game 7 was actually a positive for them, seeing how Rasheed vastly outperformed Perkins' average game.

If you really want to play this game, if Ariza AND Bynum was healthy for all 3 years, the Lakers would of 3-peated. Kobe was also easily the better player all 3 years.

Bynum has not been essential to the Lakers success. He just an excuse to why they didn't win or why they think they be better. Putting 2 of the 3 on the floor has not shown much benefit because one of them had Gasol at PF. Not to mention it has hurt Gasol offensively. The increased role of Bynum is a big reason why they started to decline.

Your talking Bynum and the Celtics have either lost there best player or has there best player really injured. Its debatable if the Lakers even needed Bynum. The Celtics were looking like one of the great teams in history when KG was healthy.

Why do I care about a RS game. The Celtics were good enough to have a 19 game winning streak and pretty much look like the dominate team in the league. Watching the Lakers vs the Magic I would have taken my chances that the Celtics would have beaten them. If they had landed home court I would say very little shot of the Lakers winning.

Do you really think the Lakers were a Bynum and Ariza away from beating the Celtics the first time. Honestly that suggest to me your just giving me Laker homer talk. The Lakers weren't even competitive in Boston. The Celtics were better that year.

Game 7 the Lakers dominated the Celtics on the glass. Garnett couldn't grab a rebound with his injuries and they didn't have Perkins. Wallace didn't help at all in what the Celtics needed which was rebounding.

If I find those Kobe and Gasol numbers I will post them. I know Gasol in the regular season and post season had shot higher from the field and was more productive with Kobe not in the game. Honestly Gasol was one of the best offensive big men in the game before Kobe. Why do Kobe fans try to take credit for Gasol success with Kobe.

[semi-sentient]

Lakers have not shown they played better with Bynum. That Odom and Gasol was there best 4 and 5. That Gasol at PF didn't work consistently defensively. Phil Jackson didn't even buy in that they were better with Bynum.

Since 2008 (starting lineup):

Bynum / Gasol: 149-61 (.710)
Gasol / Odom: 57-24 (.704)

The Lakers were clearly better with Bynum, although Gasol and Odom worked better together and tended to finish games stronger. Bynum was an important part of the Lakers big 3 rotation, and while not the most important part, the Lakers were without question better with him than without.

His only real issue was injuries, and had he not been injured so often the Lakers would have had a strong chance at 3-peating.

[richboy]

No they played better in the triangle and Phil Jackson. Just to note Gasol over the years has better offensive numbers when Kobe is out. Plus Gasol career high PER was in Memphis. He was very efficient there was well. The only thing Gasol did for Kobe was be sure he wasn't good enough to take too much credit. Gasol should have been one of the most utilized big men in the league with his numbers and instead he had to fight for touches. The triangle and Phil Jackson saved Kobe Bryant from a career of just being a stat padder freezing out his teammates. Anytime Phil Jackson isn't around its a disaster for the rest of the roster. Dwight Howard was willing to play with Kobe if Phil was there. He knows the deal. He read Phil's book. Mike D, Mike Brown, Rudy T pretty much let Kobe do whatever he wanted.

Honestly though your searching. Kobe has played with great players that hated playing with him. So your stuck saying well Smush Parker did well playing with Kobe. Kobe has played with maybe a hundred different teammates. I'm sure there a few players that have done well with him. Especially if you don't want plays run for you. Just like to spot up for jumpers. Derek Fisher perfect player next to Kobe. Odom. He doesn't even like to score. Perfect next to Kobe.

To win titles you need superstar players and Kobe is hell to play with for other high usage players. Kobe himself has said this. It doesn't matter who Kobe plays with. If you play with him you have to change your usage and your style. Kobe has no ability to play a different style. He gets all his self worth in aggressive scoring. If David Stern had not blocked the Gasol/Paul trade right now we be having is Kobe the most difficult player in league history to play with threads. As we watch Kobe rack up 30 plus usage playing with Howard and Paul. Suddenly Steve Nash sucked offensively with the Lakers and everything had to be run with Kobe. People tossed it to the side because of Nash's age. Every year I keep thinking Kobe not going to need to shoot so much this year. Every year he jacking them up at the top of the league.

Your ability to mesh with other stars is huge in evaluating players. This isn't a game of one on one. This is a team game and to win you need great teammates. Pretty much any great player I put next to Kobe I know expect them to see less touches and get less production. Of course I'm sure Smush Parker will make up for it.

Pau and Bynum's FG% actually dropped dramatically when Kobe went out. Their volume might go up, but their FG% dropped a ton (especially Bynum). Who exactly played worse with Kobe? Can you name anyone that was worse with Kobe?

Blaming Nash's problems last year on Kobe is just laughable because a) Nash is old and injured and b) when Kobe was letting Nash do his thing and dropping 30 ppg on 60+ TS%, the Lakers were losing like crazy. The Lakers just don't have the shooters for Nash's playstyle, and the fact that Dwight just straight up REFUSES to run pick and rolls with Nash didn't help either.

"Ability to mesh with other stars is huge in evaluating players". Now tell me which star sucked playing with Kobe. Shaq had his prime years with Kobe. Gasol had his best years with Kobe. It's funny you keep spewing out your same agenda over and over again, yet does not recognize the simple fact that stars when teamed up together almost always have decreased touches and volume production. Dwyane Wade went from 30 ppg player and a potential MVP to a 20 PPG player and a role player with LeBron. Chris Bosh went from being one of the best PFs in this league to a mid range jump shooter. If there is anyone that has problems meshing, its LeBron and not Kobe.

You pretty much said what I said Kobe fans would say. Well Nash was old and not 100%. That is why Kobe had to do this. It is the usual rhetoric anytime you criticize Kobe. They rarely put any blame on Kobe and everything is always the fault of another player. The fact is we know there was zero chance that Nash was going to get the ball like he did in Phoenix.

They still ran PNR with Dwight and Kobe. I said before the year I give just a few weeks before Kobe replaces Nash in Mike D offense and Nash takes on the Derek Fisher role. No shot that Nash was ever going to be the primary ball handler.

Stars have to mesh. Kobe isn't getting high usage stars though. Dwight Howard was only a 13 shot per game player and 26% usage in Orlando. That should be easy to put in your offense. Pau Gasol was similar in Memphis. Dwight Howard fell to near his rookie numbers. Gasol usage dropped a ton despite playing better. They added Nash. Kobe Bryant though keeps on getting his shots. It doesn't matter the situation. Phil Jackson last year cut Kobe's minutes. Kobe just figured he have to shoot more in the minutes he was getting and still finished over 20 shots per game. Saying Lebron can't mesh is a joke. Lebron could easily become a less shot attempt player because he doesn't get all his value in shooting.

Shaq was a great player before Kobe. He wasn't someone who went to the Lakers and had to take what Kobe gave him. He was the man and Kobe was trying to take from him. After Shaq left its been the Kobe show. He gets the shots and everyone fits in with what is left. Not having Phil Jackson you don't have anyone to put the clamps down on him.

[richboy]

Lakers have not shown they played better with Bynum. That Odom and Gasol was there best 4 and 5. That Gasol at PF didn't work consistently defensively. Phil Jackson didn't even buy in that they were better with Bynum.

Since 2008 (starting lineup):

Bynum / Gasol: 149-61 (.710)
Gasol / Odom: 57-24 (.704)

The Lakers were clearly better with Bynum, although Gasol and Odom worked better together and tended to finish games stronger. Bynum was an important part of the Lakers big 3 rotation, and while not the most important part, the Lakers were without question better with him than without.

His only real issue was injuries, and had he not been injured so often the Lakers would have had a strong chance at 3-peating.

http://deadspin.com/5919528/phil-jackso ... akers-mojo

[LakerLegend]

Richboy you used to be a pretty solid Kobe supporter in your early years here, what changed who knows.