RealGM Top 100 List -- 2011

[spree8]

Ok, we'll be waiting to hear that evidence from you

Edit: I'd also like to see how you "properly value his accomplishments". Using these APM stats? Even the "great minds" say they're not 100% able to give an accurate assessment of a players value...especially considering how many different interpretations and variations there are of this particularly favored stat. I'll listen to the pros who "aren't business savvy" (which isn't even relevant) and the pro analysts and take these advanced stats with a grain of salt...though they can be somewhat reliable...they're not 100% and can be inaccurate.

Hey Spree,

Good to see made your way to the PC board. On the Knicks board you were insistent that Kobe is a top 5 player of all-time. If you think 10 is too low for him, are you sticking with top 5, or you have him somewhere else now?

Haha yea dude, figured I'd have a look around. I (and you I remember) believe 10 was on the low end...5 may be high in a lot of people eyes, but 10 is low just the same. I honestly would be ok with someone putting a dominant player like Shaq above him, and although Magic, Bird, and Duncan were great, I don't think they're better than Kobe.

Magic with his passing, rebounding and scoring ability didn't shoot as well as Bryant nor was he close to Kobe on the defensive end (the latter being the difference maker for me).

Duncan as awesome as he is has never won back to back titles...although he's won 4, and is the best pf of all time, I think that takes away some points because I think winning consecutive titles is more of a show of dominance. That may be my personal opinion.

Bird was phenomenal on both ends of the court...may rank higher than Magic too because of that, but since he didn't win as many as Kobe I wouldn't personally rank him higher.

Like I mentioned before, Kobe had Shaq and Phil the way Magic had Kareem, Worthy, and Riley. The way Duncan had DRob, Parker, Ginobli and Pop. Same with Bird having McHale, Parish, and Auerbach helping to mold him. Even Shaq had DWade, Zo and Riley after the Lakers. So I don't think people should take away from Kobe because of that especially when he did it back to back with Gasol/Bynum and Phil.

I've seen people post lists without any explanation, some with only a little explanation and some with good/bad justification...I haven't seen a head to head comparison showing why those guys rank higher than Kobe. I really don't get how players like KG, Dream or Malone were said to be better. I think that's personally a little crazy.

[spree8]

You don't really need to dive into "advance stats" to say Bryant isn't a top 5 player. I mean advance stats are still stats, they are not made up, they derive from things that happen on the court.

People calling Bryant the greatest Laker of all time doesn't really mean that people think he is the best Laker of all time (though there are plenty who do think that).

His accolades are nice, but all of the all time greats have a lot of that stuff, it's arbitrary to say who's trophies are nicer especially when a lot of these players didn't play at the same time as Bryant and vice versa.

It's not just people calling him the greatest Laker of all time...again it's Magic saying he's on the Mt Rushmore of all time greats, it's Barkley saying he's top 5, Kenny Smith saying 6th, Dr J saying top 5, Lebron saying top 5, Durant saying top 2, Shaq ...said greatest Laker. Legler ranked him 5th and Broussard ranked him 6th. Like I said, people can laugh and discredit those aforementioned legend, stars, pro analysts to argue their belief but it is what it is...they're the pros and we are fans. They are more credible sources when you ask 9 out of 10 people..."hey would you trust a bunch of NBA legend's opinion or the NBA's top 2 superstars opinions or ESPN's top 2 analysts opinion OR an internet blogger's opinion?"

I'm not saying his trophies are better than others...that's asinine. I've compared many more aspects in my most recent post.

[HeartBreakKid]

You don't really need to dive into "advance stats" to say Bryant isn't a top 5 player. I mean advance stats are still stats, they are not made up, they derive from things that happen on the court.

People calling Bryant the greatest Laker of all time doesn't really mean that people think he is the best Laker of all time (though there are plenty who do think that).

His accolades are nice, but all of the all time greats have a lot of that stuff, it's arbitrary to say who's trophies are nicer especially when a lot of these players didn't play at the same time as Bryant and vice versa.

It's not just people calling him the greatest Laker of all time...again it's Magic saying he's on the Mt Rushmore of all time greats, it's Barkley saying he's top 5, Kenny Smith saying 6th, Dr J saying top 5, Lebron saying top 5, Durant saying top 2, Shaq ...said greatest Laker. Legler ranked him 5th and Broussard ranked him 6th. Like I said, people can laugh and discredit those aforementioned legend, stars, pro analysts to argue their belief but it is what it is...they're the pros and we are fans. They are more credible sources when you ask 9 out of 10 people..."hey would you trust a bunch of NBA legend's opinion or the NBA's top 2 superstars opinions or ESPN's top 2 analysts opinion OR an internet blogger's opinion?"

I'm not saying his trophies are better than others...that's asinine. I've compared many more aspects in my most recent post.

Well, there are two counters to your point


1) NBA players are famous for playing basketball, not for analyzing basketball. Shaq and Magic Johnson are terrible sports analyst. Who is Broussard, Chris Broussard?

If what your saying had merit, then Michael Jordan would be the GOAT executive.

The internet bloggers opinion jipe is really ignorant. No, an internet blogger saying Jordan is better than Bryant doesn't have much merit in itself, but if he or she explains why, then why on earth would that not stand up in itself?




2) This whole jibber jabber about Barkley says this guy is top 5 and Magic said this guy is top 2 is all them talking crap really, those guys say things like that so frequently, it's hard to take their opinions seriously.

I believe you a 100% that they all said that. But you do know that these guys don't actually think about this stuff, and if you asked them an hour later if Kareem was a top 2 player, they would say yes, then an hour later asked if Magic was a top 2 player, they would say yes, then asked if Chamberlain was a top 2 player, they would say yes - I hope you see my point, they contradict themselves.

I've seen Barkley talk negatively of Bryant before in an all time sense, especially ever since Barkley been hyping up James, but I have no doubt that what you're saying is true when you claimed that Barkley put him in his top 5 or what ever.

Also, if basketball players opinions matter the most, then what if two different basketball players have different opinions? Who's word holds more weight, who ever the better basketball player was in real life? Magic says Kobe Bryant is the greatest Laker or what ever, and Oscar Robertson says Kobe Bryant ain't ****. (and to point out the ludicrous of these guys opinions, Robertson earlier in his life gave Bryant all the praise in the world).

If someone like James said Bryant is on his mount Rushmore, didn't James have all perimeter players on there, including Oscar Robertson? If James opinion is so credible to you, wouldn't you then have to acknowledge that Big O is a top 5 player, and players like Shaq, Kareem, Hakeem, Russell and Chamberlain are not? In other words, how is James not destroying his own credibility there, or does him having MVP's means he can say things that do not make sense? (or perhaps to phrase it better, does that mean he has no reason to explain himself?).


Saying Bryant is better than other people "just because" is a poor reason. It doesn't matter if it is a random guy, a person who works for ESPN (and being a reporter isn't the same thing as being an analyst, I can get a job at ESPN, it doesn't mean I know everything about sports), Charles Barkley, the Ghost of George Mikan or the Dalai Lama - in order for someones opinion to hold weight, it needs elaboration, other wise it means nothing. Most of the examples of guys you listed I bet didn't really elaborate or explain their reasoning. At most some of those guys probably just said Bryant deserves top 5 rankings because he won a lot.

[spree8]

You don't really need to dive into "advance stats" to say Bryant isn't a top 5 player. I mean advance stats are still stats, they are not made up, they derive from things that happen on the court.

People calling Bryant the greatest Laker of all time doesn't really mean that people think he is the best Laker of all time (though there are plenty who do think that).

His accolades are nice, but all of the all time greats have a lot of that stuff, it's arbitrary to say who's trophies are nicer especially when a lot of these players didn't play at the same time as Bryant and vice versa.

It's not just people calling him the greatest Laker of all time...again it's Magic saying he's on the Mt Rushmore of all time greats, it's Barkley saying he's top 5, Kenny Smith saying 6th, Dr J saying top 5, Lebron saying top 5, Durant saying top 2, Shaq ...said greatest Laker. Legler ranked him 5th and Broussard ranked him 6th. Like I said, people can laugh and discredit those aforementioned legend, stars, pro analysts to argue their belief but it is what it is...they're the pros and we are fans. They are more credible sources when you ask 9 out of 10 people..."hey would you trust a bunch of NBA legend's opinion or the NBA's top 2 superstars opinions or ESPN's top 2 analysts opinion OR an internet blogger's opinion?"

I'm not saying his trophies are better than others...that's asinine. I've compared many more aspects in my most recent post.

Well, there are two counters to your point


1) NBA players are famous for playing basketball, not for analyzing basketball. Shaq and Magic Johnson are terrible sports analyst. Who is Broussard, Chris Broussard?

If what your saying had merit, then Michael Jordan would be the GOAT executive.

The internet bloggers opinion jipe is really ignorant. No, an internet blogger saying Jordan is better than Bryant doesn't have much merit in itself, but if he or she explains why, then why on earth would that not stand up in itself?




2) This whole jibber jabber about Barkley says this guy is top 5 and Magic said this guy is top 2 is all crap really, those guys say things like that so frequently, it's hard to take their opinions seriously.

I believe you a 100% that they all said that. But you do know that these guys don't actually think about this stuff, and if you asked them an hour later if Kareem was a top 2 player, they would say yes, then an hour later asked if Magic was a top 2 player, they would say yes, then asked if Chamberlain was a top 2 player, they would say yes - I hope you see my point, they contradict themselves.

I've seen Barkley talk negatively of Bryant before in an all time sense, especially ever since Barkley been hyping up James, but I have no doubt that what you're saying is true when you claimed that Barkley put him in his top 5 or what ever.

Also, if basketball players opinions matter the most, then what if two different basketball players have different opinions? Who's word holds more weight, who ever the better basketball player was in real life? Magic says Kobe Bryant is the greatest Laker or what ever, and Oscar Robertson says Kobe Bryant ain't ****. (and to point out the ludicrous of these guys opinions, Robertson earlier in his life gave Bryant all the praise in the world).

If someone like James said Bryant is on his mount Rushmore, didn't James have all perimeter players on there, including Oscar Robertson? If James opinion is so credible to you, wouldn't you then have to acknowledge that Big O is a top 5 player, and players like Shaq, Kareem, Hakeem, Russell and Chamberlain are not? In other words, how is James not destroying his own credibility there, or does him having MVP's means he can say things that do not make sense? (or perhaps to phrase it better, does that mean he has no reason to explain himself?).


Saying Bryant is better than other people "just because" is a poor reason. It doesn't matter if it is a random guy, a person who works for ESPN (and being a reporter isn't the same thing as being an analyst, I can get a job at ESPN, it doesn't mean I know everything about sports), Charles Barkley, the Ghost of George Mikan or the Dalai Lama - in order for someones opinion to hold weight, it needs elaboration, other wise it means nothing. Most of the examples of guys you listed I bet didn't really elaborate or explain their reasoning. At most some of those guys probably just said Bryant deserves top 5 rankings because he won a lot.

That's what I'm saying...people are going to make excuses as to why these great players opinions don't count. They all said this and yes they have explained themselves and no they have no contradicted themselves at all. Make fun of Broussard, but that dude has been paid by ESPN to cover everything while we blog for free and watch part time.

Someone else made that MJ executive comparison before and that is completely apples to oranges here bro. Nobody can tell the future...nobody knows what a player will turn out to be. Making a bad draft choice is hardly an example of poor basketball knowledge.

To say that just because a person is a great player doesn't make them a credible source is also convenient for the counter argument but entirely ridiculous at the same time. These guys are great because they're great students of the game. They read players, systems, coaching etc all the damn time. They are constantly being taught every aspect of the game and what it takes to win...they play against greats and are coached by the greats...how the hell doesn't that make them knowledgable?????

Honestly when people discredit them I have such a strong desire to just end the convo there because that's really crazy. It's one thing to say you disagree but to put them down is absurd and blasphemous. Shaq and Barkley are far from bad analysts...just because they goof around doesn't take away from their basketball IQ. Don't let that fool you. A lot of what they say is true regarding outcomes and their analysis of players/teams are entirely accurate a lot of the time.

It's so easy to discredit them, but when you don't provide anything to back up your statement how does that make you look? Like you have an agenda.

[spree8]

I would really like a legit reasoning as to why Magic, Bird, Duncan, Dream >>> Kobe in someone's opinion. I've already explained my reasoning. I'll accept Shaq even though I disagree, but wouldn't mind an explanation on that either. I know I sound like a broken record, but considering...


Kobe is a much better defender/shooter/scorer than Magic who was a better passer/rebounder

Kobe a better playoff/big game performer/defender with more rings than Bird

Kobe is a better scorer while Dream has the edge on defense. Both great bball IQ but the edge goes to Kobe imo. And Kobe has more rings.

Kobe has won consecutive titles multiple times unlike Duncan. Both great defenders but Kobe is the superior scorer. Both great bball IQ.

Kobe outdid Shaq by winning one more ring without the other. Shaq was a more overpowering presence but a liability in the clutch due to his free throw shooting when Kobe was at his best when it mattered most (closing). Both great defenders with high bball IQ but I'd give the edge to Kobe.


I've searched every page in this thread an have yet to find anything legit. Also searched the last 10 pages on this forum...found nothing good.

[Jaivl]

...

Player =/= team.

I guess you could make a case for Steve Kerr being better than Kobe. He is the all-time leader in 3P%, a better closer (remember that shot against Utah? Damn) and way better as a commentator than the Mamba.

[spree8]

...

Player =/= team.

I guess you could make a case for Steve Kerr being better than Kobe. He is the all-time leader in 3P%, a better closer (remember that shot against Utah? Damn) and way better as a commentator than the Mamba.

Do me a favor and don't quote me in garbage posts like this...don't need to waste my time with a notification. Thanks.

[therealbig3]

Well, a lot of your criteria boils down to Kobe winning more, when the reality is, he didn't win 5 rings...the LAKERS won 5 rings.

Simply put, a lot of us just don't care about team success when evaluating individual players...all we care about is how good of a player they are. And using that logic, you'd see that there's really no insult to ranking Kobe below Bird, Magic, Dream, Duncan, and Shaq...and that there's really no insult to consider that guys like Dr. J, KG, and Dirk might also be comparable to or better than Kobe. Team circumstances are vastly different between players, not everyone is lucky enough to be surrounded by a great team their entire prime save for like 3 seasons. KG was stuck with bad teams pretty much his entire prime. Dr. J was in the ABA (a comparable league to the NBA at the time) for most of his career, and as a result, many people just dismiss how great of a player he was. Dirk has been really similar to Kobe throughout his career, but again, he didn't have quite as good of a team throughout his prime, and as a result, he didn't achieve the same team success. But his playing level was at minimum, quite comparable.

[spree8]

Well, a lot of your criteria boils down to Kobe winning more, when the reality is, he didn't win 5 rings...the LAKERS won 5 rings.

Simply put, a lot of us just don't care about team success when evaluating individual players...all we care about is how good of a player they are. And using that logic, you'd see that there's really no insult to ranking Kobe below Bird, Magic, Dream, Duncan, and Shaq...and that there's really no insult to consider that guys like Dr. J, KG, and Dirk might also be comparable to or better than Kobe. Team circumstances are vastly different between players, not everyone is lucky enough to be surrounded by a great team their entire prime save for like 3 seasons. KG was stuck with bad teams pretty much his entire prime. Dr. J was in the ABA (a comparable league to the NBA at the time) for most of his career, and as a result, many people just dismiss how great of a player he was. Dirk has been really similar to Kobe throughout his career, but again, he didn't have quite as good of a team throughout his prime, and as a result, he didn't achieve the same team success. But his playing level was at minimum, quite comparable.

No, I've mentioned plenty of other reasons when comparing. You aren't acknowledging anything else? To say my argument boils down to championships only is a complete disregard of everything else I've said.

[therealbig3]

Well, a lot of your criteria boils down to Kobe winning more

To say it boils down to championships only is a complete disregard of everything else I've said.

"A lot" =/= "only"

And it's true, pretty much every one of your arguments ends with "and Kobe has 5 championships".

For example, your main argument against Duncan is that Kobe has won back to back championships and Duncan hasn't. LOL, what kind of criteria is that?

[spree8]

Well, a lot of your criteria boils down to Kobe winning more

To say it boils down to championships only is a complete disregard of everything else I've said.

"A lot" =/= "only"

And it's true, pretty much every one of your arguments ends with "and Kobe has 5 championships".

For example, your main argument against Duncan is that Kobe has won back to back championships and Duncan hasn't. LOL, what kind of criteria is that?

I've mentioned much more than that in other posts, I'm just tired of repeating every detail so gave a quick run down. It's certainly not the only thing.

Kobe is a much better closer, shooter, scorer, shot creator, creator on offense for teammates, coordinator on offense, higher bball IQ, free throw shooter, 3pt shooter, more steals, assists, more defensive team honors/1st team honors, equal to if not better defender, and finally has more consecutive championships that he willed his team to...people can say put Dirk with Shaq and they win, but that's not necessarily true considering how close they came to losing.

Duncan is a better shot locker and rebounder.

Happy now? I got plenty more for every other match up...I didn't know I had spell everything out.

[ceiling raiser]

Well, a lot of your criteria boils down to Kobe winning more

To say it boils down to championships only is a complete disregard of everything else I've said.

"A lot" =/= "only"

And it's true, pretty much every one of your arguments ends with "and Kobe has 5 championships".

For example, your main argument against Duncan is that Kobe has won back to back championships and Duncan hasn't. LOL, what kind of criteria is that?

I've mentioned much more than that in other posts, I'm just tired of repeating every detail so gave a quick run down. It's certainly not the only thing.

Kobe is a much better closer, shooter, scorer, shot creator, creator on offense for teammates, coordinator on offense, higher bball IQ, free throw shooter, 3pt shooter, more steals, assists, more defensive team honors/1st team honors, equal to if not better defender, and finally has more consecutive championships that he willed his team to...people can say put Dirk with Shaq and they win, but that's not necessarily true considering how close they came to losing.

Duncan is a better shot locker and rebounder.

Happy now? I got plenty more for every other match up...I didn't know I had spell everything out.

Kobe's an equal/a better defender than Duncan? That's disturbing. C'mon dude.

[spree8]

"A lot" =/= "only"

And it's true, pretty much every one of your arguments ends with "and Kobe has 5 championships".

For example, your main argument against Duncan is that Kobe has won back to back championships and Duncan hasn't. LOL, what kind of criteria is that?

I've mentioned much more than that in other posts, I'm just tired of repeating every detail so gave a quick run down. It's certainly not the only thing.

Kobe is a much better closer, shooter, scorer, shot creator, creator on offense for teammates, coordinator on offense, higher bball IQ, free throw shooter, 3pt shooter, more steals, assists, more defensive team honors/1st team honors, equal to if not better defender, and finally has more consecutive championships that he willed his team to...people can say put Dirk with Shaq and they win, but that's not necessarily true considering how close they came to losing.

Duncan is a better shot locker and rebounder.

Happy now? I got plenty more for every other match up...I didn't know I had spell everything out.

Kobe's a better defender than Duncan? That's disturbing. C'mon dude.

Where the hell do you get the difference in defense between Kobe and Duncan = disturbing? I could see if I said Dirk and Duncan...Kobe has 11 time all defensive team honors and 9 time 1st team tied with MJ KG and Glove...what is so disturbing about that? Please don't start that bs about how he made it off past reputation like others have...you don't win those honors that way. It's an excuse.

[therealbig3]

Well, a lot of your criteria boils down to Kobe winning more

To say it boils down to championships only is a complete disregard of everything else I've said.

"A lot" =/= "only"

And it's true, pretty much every one of your arguments ends with "and Kobe has 5 championships".

For example, your main argument against Duncan is that Kobe has won back to back championships and Duncan hasn't. LOL, what kind of criteria is that?

I've mentioned much more than that in other posts, I'm just tired of repeating every detail so gave a quick run down. It's certainly not the only thing.

Kobe is a much better closer, shooter, scorer, shot creator, creator on offense for teammates, coordinator on offense, higher bball IQ, free throw shooter, 3pt shooter, more steals, assists, more defensive team honors/1st team honors, equal to if not better defender, and finally has more consecutive championships that he willed his team to...people can say put Dirk with Shaq and they win, but that's not necessarily true considering how close they came to losing.

Duncan is a better shot locker and rebounder.

Happy now? I got plenty more for every other match up...I didn't know I had spell everything out.

I mean, tbh, I was mainly arguing about using the team success argument at all, because it doesn't make sense to me.

It's pretty easy to see Kobe's advantage: he's a superior offensive player to Duncan. It's pretty easy to see Duncan's advantage: he's a superior defensive player to Kobe. I really don't see how either of those two are arguable.

But Duncan, to most people, has a larger advantage on defense than Kobe has on offense, because Duncan himself was a very good offensive player that anchored good offensive teams. Meanwhile, there isn't a whole lot of objective evidence that Kobe was all that great of a defender or was all that impactful. A small positive impact defender at best...Duncan was GOAT-caliber defender at best. That's kind of a massive difference. Kobe is one of the best offensive players of all time in his own right, and is certainly significantly superior to Duncan on that end of the court, but again, Duncan himself was a guy you could run a successful offense around, and he was a guy that demanded doubles, and forced opposing defenses to gameplan for him. Furthermore, Kobe himself leaves something to be desired offensively at times, because his decision-making isn't the best, and as a result, he's not THAT efficient of an offensive player, relative to other elite offensive players.

That's why most people would pick Duncan.

[Jaivl]

Kobe is a much better closer

No.

shooter, scorer

Yes.

shot creator

That goes under "better scorer".

creator on offense for teammates

At times, usually yes.

coordinator on offense

Coordinator = leadership? No.

higher bball IQ

Hell no.

free throw shooter, 3pt shooter

That goes under "better scorer" too.

more steals, assists

Yeah.

more defensive team honors/1st team honors, equal to if not better defender

That's very disrespectful.

and finally has more consecutive championships that he willed his team to...

What does that mean? Isn't basketball played 5 on 5?

Ah, and Duncan has a better bank shot, a better hook shot, distributes better on the low block, is taller, has a bigger wingspan, is better on help defense, man defense, post defense, offensive rebounding, defensive rebounding, better at gathering contested rebounds, played more positions, has better intangibles, better leadership qualities, never missed the postseason, never went under .600 wins, and the most important thing, he willed his team, that never had won before, to a title.

[therealbig3]

Where the hell do you get the difference in defense between Kobe and Duncan = disturbing? I could see if I said Dirk and Duncan...Kobe has 11 time all defensive team honors and 9 time 1st team tied with MJ KG and Glove...what is so disturbing about that? Please don't start that bs about how he made it off past reputation like others have...you don't win those honors that way. It's an excuse.

See, this is why your opinion is so radically different than most of the people that made the list. Because you're putting A TON of weight into media-driven narrative (and that's all the All-D teams are). +/-, on/off, with/without, and even the controversial eye-test all convincingly point to Duncan being the superior defensive player, and it's not even close.

[ceiling raiser]

I've mentioned much more than that in other posts, I'm just tired of repeating every detail so gave a quick run down. It's certainly not the only thing.

Kobe is a much better closer, shooter, scorer, shot creator, creator on offense for teammates, coordinator on offense, higher bball IQ, free throw shooter, 3pt shooter, more steals, assists, more defensive team honors/1st team honors, equal to if not better defender, and finally has more consecutive championships that he willed his team to...people can say put Dirk with Shaq and they win, but that's not necessarily true considering how close they came to losing.

Duncan is a better shot locker and rebounder.

Happy now? I got plenty more for every other match up...I didn't know I had spell everything out.

Kobe's a better defender than Duncan? That's disturbing. C'mon dude.

Where the hell do you get the difference in defense between Kobe and Duncan = disturbing? I could see if I said Dirk and Duncan...Kobe has 11 time all defensive team honors and 9 time 1st team tied with MJ KG and Glove...what is so disturbing about that? Please don't start that bs about how he made it off past reputation like others have...you don't win those honors that way. It's an excuse.

Apologies if that came off as harsh, but that was my reaction when I got to that part of your post. If you're trying to prevent me from bringing valid points up in the conversation, than we don't need to have one. Have a good one, dude.

[spree8]

"A lot" =/= "only"

And it's true, pretty much every one of your arguments ends with "and Kobe has 5 championships".

For example, your main argument against Duncan is that Kobe has won back to back championships and Duncan hasn't. LOL, what kind of criteria is that?

I've mentioned much more than that in other posts, I'm just tired of repeating every detail so gave a quick run down. It's certainly not the only thing.

Kobe is a much better closer, shooter, scorer, shot creator, creator on offense for teammates, coordinator on offense, higher bball IQ, free throw shooter, 3pt shooter, more steals, assists, more defensive team honors/1st team honors, equal to if not better defender, and finally has more consecutive championships that he willed his team to...people can say put Dirk with Shaq and they win, but that's not necessarily true considering how close they came to losing.

Duncan is a better shot locker and rebounder.

Happy now? I got plenty more for every other match up...I didn't know I had spell everything out.

I mean, tbh, I was mainly arguing about using the team success argument at all, because it doesn't make sense to me.

It's pretty easy to see Kobe's advantage: he's a superior offensive player to Duncan. It's pretty easy to see Duncan's advantage: he's a superior defensive player to Kobe. I really don't see how either of those two are arguable.

But Duncan, to most people, has a larger advantage on defense than Kobe has on offense, because Duncan himself was a very good offensive player that anchored good offensive teams. Meanwhile, there isn't a whole lot of objective evidence that Kobe was all that great of a defender or was all that impactful. A small positive impact defender at best...Duncan was GOAT-caliber defender at best. That's kind of a massive difference. Kobe is one of the best offensive players of all time in his own right, and is certainly significantly superior to Duncan on that end of the court, but again, Duncan himself was a guy you could run a successful offense around, and he was a guy that demanded doubles, and forced opposing defenses to gameplan for him. Furthermore, Kobe himself leaves something to be desired offensively at times, because his decision-making isn't the best, and as a result, he's not THAT efficient of an offensive player, relative to other elite offensive players.

That's why most people would pick Duncan.

I disagree on the defensive end. Are we using defensive ratings or defensive win shares because Kobe has much higher ratings and Duncan has a 3 point differential on win shares...very good, up there with greats of course but you're acting as though Kobe is a slouch. Again, he also has more all defensive 1st team tied with great defenders...again...MJ KG and Glove. Their offensive ability and production is a massive difference. Just because Duncan can draw a double team and pass out of it doesn't make him close to Kobe...that's insane. Look at all the areas I mentioned he is better than Duncan in on the offensive end. Add his 81 point record, 3pt record, most consecutive free throw record, all time scoring list record...c'mon fellas.

[spree8]

Kobe's a better defender than Duncan? That's disturbing. C'mon dude.

Where the hell do you get the difference in defense between Kobe and Duncan = disturbing? I could see if I said Dirk and Duncan...Kobe has 11 time all defensive team honors and 9 time 1st team tied with MJ KG and Glove...what is so disturbing about that? Please don't start that bs about how he made it off past reputation like others have...you don't win those honors that way. It's an excuse.

Apologies if that came off as harsh, but that was my reaction when I got to that part of your post. If you're trying to prevent me from bringing valid points up in the conversation, than we don't need to have one. Have a good one, dude.

Wtf? How am I preventing you from bringing up a valid point? That is not a valid point! These people are paid to watch games...ALOT of games ....they have not registered to a website to post here and there about games they watch, watch sometimes, or not at all. You guys gotta stop discrediting everything that doesn't support your side. It's crazy to sit there and command respect for your post when you give no credit to others ESPECIALLY when they are nba legends superstars and pro analysts. It really speaks volumes when someone does that.

[spree8]

Kobe is a much better closer

No.
proof?

shooter, scorer

Yes.

shot creator

That goes under "better scorer".

ok

creator on offense for teammates

At times, usually yes.

coordinator on offense

Coordinator = leadership? No.

no I mean running an offense

higher bball IQ

Hell no.

lol your opinion I guess

free throw shooter, 3pt shooter

That goes under "better scorer" too.

no it doesn't...this is recorded differently by the league

more steals, assists

Yeah.

more defensive team honors/1st team honors, equal to if not better defender

That's very disrespectful.

how so? Kobe has a much better defensive rating as well but Duncan has more defensive win shares...add to that those votes and it looks pretty close to me

and finally has more consecutive championships that he willed his team to...

What does that mean? Isn't basketball played 5 on 5?

whatever dude lol

Ah, and Duncan has a better bank shot, a better hook shot, distributes better on the low block, is taller, has a bigger wingspan, is better on help defense, man defense, post defense, offensive rebounding, defensive rebounding, better at gathering contested rebounds, played more positions, has better intangibles, better leadership qualities, never missed the postseason, never went under .600 wins, and the most important thing, he willed his team, that never had won before, to a title.

NBA doesn't keep put emphasis or record hook shots, bank shots etc ...they do for free throws and 3's. Willed his franchise to their first title but couldn't do it back to back. Thanks.