RealGM Top 100 List #10

[batmana]

I have the vote as follows:

Larry Bird ((12) Baller2014, DQuinn1575, ClydeFrazier, Warspite, rich316. DHodgkins, acrossthecourt, trex_8063. ronnymac2, Moonbeam, ChuckTexas, DannyNoonan1221

Kobe (3) andrewww, GCPantalones, AnUnbiasedFan

Garnett (2) PCProductions, therealbig3

DRobinson (1) magicmerl

I also voted for Larry Bird in post 102, I just couldn't bold it since I was posting from my phone. I went back and edited it.

[andrewww]

Firstly I'd like to clarify that those who are or have voted for Kobe aren't necessarily 'Kobe fans' only because otherwise you'd have some outrageous votes having already been placed in earlier slots than #10.

Secondly, no one is letting this slide. If he didnt' have these flaws, I'm pretty sure he'd be ranked higher.

He was an integral part of 5 championship teams who made 7 Finals appearances despite the shot selection issues. And as I've illustrated in earlier comments, his 'attitude issues' never directly impacted a single Finals appearance, something I can't say for Bird when his bar fight directly impacted the '85 Finals. Imagine it was KB who committed the same mistake, he would have been grilled!

I personally don't care too much to bring up attitude issues for the most part, although I did want to address these two points.

1) UBF had mentioned that he was going to vote for Kobe at #6...if we're going to consider votes "outrageous" then that's one that would count as Kobe is typically seen as an 11-13 player.

2) The 2004 season and Finals can be characterized as Kobe's "attitude issues" directly impacting the Finals. I give Kobe and Shaq equal blame for their inability to maturely handle their own ego issues, but Kobe's obvious issues in the 2004 Finals where he played outside the team concept because he felt he had something to prove. He was deservedly bashed for it after the Finals as well.

I disagree with both narratives.

Firstly, UBF is the most pro-kobe poster in this project, no debate. However, for every pro-kobe poster like him, I can count at least 5+ eligible voters who won't even consider him until closer to the 20th slot (baller2014 is UBF's alter ego for good measure).

Secondly, you probably didn't watch much or any of the 2004 Finals. Do you remember just what kind of impact the Malone injury had? When you have a prime tag team of Ben and Rasheed Wallace on Shaq, and a prime Tayshaun Prince on Kobe, it's going to be a tough matchup regardless. Had Shaq and Kobe been on the absolute same page playing as best they could, they would have STILL lost. That was the 1 Finals where the Lakers simply ran into a better team. Blaming that on Kobe's character issues alone?

Realistically if not for the shot at the end of game 1 to force OT, the Lakers should have been swept. It was dominance on a level not seen against a former champion until the Spurs crushed the Heat in 2014.

Shaq's burned bridges with every team he's been on almost. That should tell you enough about whether the Shaq/Kobe drama was all on Bean.

Kobe being overrated on defense. He had to carry the scoring load a lot more after 2004 until help arrived, yet no one gives him a pass for his defense because he had to expend a lot more energy on offense. Yet, I see someone like LeBron get championed for his versatility even though his man-defense is overrated, and his inconsistency due to him having to do a lot on offense is swept under the rug.

Where is the consistency?

[Reservoirdawgs]

Ok...so this is where I have ask what exactly you're looking for to decide. If NBA players, coaches, analysts hold no sway do their opinions, then what will? It would be like someone saying, 'What proof is their that MJ or Lebron are better defenders than Bird?". Other than the overwhelming viewpoint of people actually participating in game action, we don't have much.

And "Bird being regarded as a hustle/scrappy defender" relates to the common view of that era. I'm old enough to have seen him play. It seems all the questions are on Kobe, yet Bird gets the benefit of the doubt despite the common viewpoint from those who watched him, that he was an average defender.

I'm not giving Bird the benefit of the doubt...I am legitimately curious because I don't know how to objectively judge Bird's defense. I can see clips on YouTube, but that is almost as worthless as just looking at clips of Kobe or Garnett because these clips are simply snapshots that don't take the entirety of their body of work in mind. I do reject things like All-Defense teams because we know that the voters are particularly poor judges of defense that mainly go with reputation (see Kobe winning All-Defense awards when we objectively know he was a poor defender during those years). I see Bird defenders saying that Bird was a very good defender while Kobe defenders are obviously saying that Kobe was a better defender. Neither side has brought a valid point to me, although it's probably a lost argument since we don't have the same data for Bird as we do Kobe.

EDIT: Edited out teh comment about Iverson.

[ronnymac2]

I do reject things like All-Defense teams because we know that the voters are particularly poor judges of defense that mainly go with reputation (see Kobe and Iverson winning All-Defense awards when we objectively know they are poor defenders).

Wait when did Iverson win a defensive award?

[JordansBulls]

I have the vote as follows:

Larry Bird ((12) Baller2014, DQuinn1575, ClydeFrazier, Warspite, rich316. DHodgkins, acrossthecourt, trex_8063. ronnymac2, Moonbeam, ChuckTexas, DannyNoonan1221

Kobe (3) andrewww, GCPantalones, AnUnbiasedFan

Garnett (2) PCProductions, therealbig3

DRobinson (1) magicmerl

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1337226&p=40762631#p40762631

[Texas Chuck]

However, for every pro-kobe poster like him, I can count at least 5+ eligible voters who won't even consider him until closer to the 20th slot ?

1. Prove it or don't say it. Name names.

2. It's perfectly reasonable for people to not vote for Kobe until close to 20 without it being some anti-Kobe agenda. We have 9 in and the following players still not on the list: KG, Dirk, Admiral, Mailman, Dr J, Oscar, West, Moses, Bird. You can easily make a case for each of those players(and maybe some others) over Kobe which takes him pretty close to 20.

3. Why do we have so many guys still so worried about where a particular player ends up?

[MacGill]

Ok, so I don't have much time for a rebuttal right now but I do see that a few posters have answered some of the points made.

So, unless some weren't around early on in this project where attitude, quality of teammate you were, and the effect this attitude had on your team etc was, brought up by multiple posters, then here is your notice that it happened. Wilt & Shaq, and MJ to a degree were the top players to see this as more than a 'small thing'.

As I did then, I am not saying that these things shouldn't matter, they should, and I was also the one to say that one shouldn't place too much stock here. However, that wasn't what most thought about at that time and not surprisingly many who placed a lot of stock into it then, are churping crickets now. If it wasn't you, then don't take this as directed at you, it's that simple.

However, being a hard worker doesn't immune you from the same (fair) scrutiny that others received. On the flip side, Duncan's attitude was also a positive contributor to why he went #5 because he was an all-team guy etc. It doesn't matter if he goes now or not, Kobe has been mentioned for a few threads now and like everyone else, needs to have this properly weighted.

[An Unbiased Fan]

1) UBF had mentioned that he was going to vote for Kobe at #6...if we're going to consider votes "outrageous" then that's one that would count as Kobe is typically seen as an 11-13 player.

So let me get this straight. Thinking Kobe is around #6 is "outrageous" when the consensus outside RealGM has him in the same area? Yet putting him outside the Top 10 is "typical".

I didn't even vote for Kobe until thread #9. Note, we was voted in at #10 last time. I'm not a "kobe fan", i grew up on magic. I've also been called a DRob fan, Dirk, fan, Duncan fan, Stockton fan, Mikan fan, and a few others at times.

In general, RealGM's opinions on Kobe are so over the top, that the consensus view gets you labelled a "Kobe fan". You basically can't say he's a good scorer, defender, champion, or much of anything on the PC board without 5+ posters decending on a thread to tell you how wrong you are, and how he sucks. It's kinda comical, like mentioning Bushs name on a Democratic forum, or Obama on a conservative forum..

Ok...so this is where I have ask what exactly you're looking for to decide. If NBA players, coaches, analysts hold no sway do their opinions, then what will? It would be like someone saying, 'What proof is their that MJ or Lebron are better defenders than Bird?". Other than the overwhelming viewpoint of people actually participating in game action, we don't have much.

And "Bird being regarded as a hustle/scrappy defender" relates to the common view of that era. I'm old enough to have seen him play. It seems all the questions are on Kobe, yet Bird gets the benefit of the doubt despite the common viewpoint from those who watched him, that he was an average defender.

I'm not giving Bird the benefit of the doubt...I am legitimately curious because I don't know how to objectively judge Bird's defense. I can see clips on YouTube, but that is almost as worthless as just looking at clips of Kobe or Garnett because these clips are simply snapshots that don't take the entirety of their body of work in mind. I do reject things like All-Defense teams because we know that the voters are particularly poor judges of defense that mainly go with reputation (see Kobe and Iverson winning All-Defense awards when we objectively know they are poor defenders). I see Bird defenders saying that Bird was a very good defender while Kobe defenders are obviously saying that Kobe was a better defender. Neither side has brought a valid point to me, although it's probably a lost argument since we don't have the same data for Bird as we do Kobe.

I'm not sure why you think NBA coaches who are the voters for All-D teams, are poor judges of defense. Seems they would know more about it than anyone. But I didn't even really use All-D teams, and instead pointed out specific attributes like Kobe's man defense, timing, positioning, explosiveness, horizontal defense, transitional defense.

Bird was a great hustle guy, and had very good timing. But his man D sucked balls, his horizontal defense was bad, his transition defense was subpar, and the only thing that balanced that out was Bird's great defensive awareness.

If you asked Bird straight up, he would tell you Kobe's the better defender. It's a weird thing to debate honestly. When Bird is compared to guys like MJ or Lebron, then his D is rated mediocre, but with Kobe......oh well, it is what it is.

[Reservoirdawgs]

Firstly, UBF is the most pro-kobe poster in this project, no debate. However, for every pro-kobe poster like him, I can count at least 5+ eligible voters who won't even consider him until closer to the 20th slot (baller2014 is UBF's alter ego for good measure).

I think you're being intentionally overdramatic if you believe that there are "5+" voters who won't consider him closer to the 20th slot. But since you're so confident, who are these 5+ voters who won't consider Kobe until the 20th slot? I'm very curious to see who these people are.

Secondly, you probably didn't watch much or any of the 2004 Finals. Do you remember just what kind of impact the Malone injury had? When you have a prime tag team of Ben and Rasheed Wallace on Shaq, and a prime Tayshaun Prince on Kobe, it's going to be a tough matchup regardless. Had Shaq and Kobe been on the absolute same page playing as best they could, they would have STILL lost. That was the 1 Finals where the Lakers simply ran into a better team. Blaming that on Kobe's character issues alone?

Realistically if not for the shot at the end of game 1 to force OT, the Lakers should have been swept. It was dominance on a level not seen against a former champion until the Spurs crushed the Heat in 2014.

I did watch the 2004 Finals. Shaq was actually single-teamed, which is one reason why he had such a great series. However, Kobe's chucking and inability to play within a team concept played into the Pistons' hands (which was later supported by...Rip Hamilton? after the series was done). The Pistons sure weren't forcing Kobe to take heavily contested 20-foot jumpers he was willingly doing it and played awful because of it. I agree that the Lakers were most likely going to lose regardless as the Pistons' defense was just too good, but to say that Kobe did not play a part in it is fairly naive.

Shaq's burned bridges with every team he's been on almost. That should tell you enough about whether the Shaq/Kobe drama was all on Bean.

Sure...and Kobe has admitted that he can be a difficult teammate and has had more than his fair share of blowups, issues, and dramas with his teammates (that he has been called out on in the media). However, I said that the Shaq/Kobe drama blame should be spread equally as they are/were both incredibly egotistical and immature back then.

Kobe being overrated on defense. He had to carry the scoring load a lot more after 2004 until help arrived, yet no one gives him a pass for his defense because he had to expend a lot more energy on offense. Yet, I see someone like LeBron get championed for his versatility even though his man-defense is overrated, and his inconsistency due to him having to do a lot on offense is swept under the rug.

Where is the consistency?

Who has swept Lebron under the rug? Prior to this season Lebron has been great on defense, which is supported through the eye test as well as DRAPM. This season he was bad and coasted and was recognized by all for doing so (also recognized by DRAPM and the eye test). Kobe has been a relatively poor defender for the majority of his career, which is supported by the eye test and DRAPM. At one point he was good but the more we learn about basketball and the more we objectively go back and review things we see that he's not what we thought.

There's no conspiracy to keep Kobe down, try as Kobe fanboys want to believe.

[Texas Chuck]

Secondly, you probably didn't watch much or any of the 2004 Finals. Do you remember just what kind of impact the Malone injury had? When you have a prime tag team of Ben and Rasheed Wallace on Shaq, and a prime Tayshaun Prince on Kobe, it's going to be a tough matchup regardless. Had Shaq and Kobe been on the absolute same page playing as best they could, they would have STILL lost. That was the 1 Finals where the Lakers simply ran into a better team. Blaming that on Kobe's character issues alone?

I watched every minute of the 2004 Finals so I hope I can comment. But mainly I just want to mention that if I were trying to make a pro-Kobe case I wouldn't suggest that being guarded by Tayshaun Prince means Kobe is helpless to play well. Prince was a decent player, and a decent defender, but....please don't call this prime Prince when it was only his 2nd year in the league and he only played 435 minutes as a rookie so he was still a very inexperienced defender. His length had an impact, and obviously the Pistons played great team defense, but Kobe had plenty of good lucks. He was just off.

It happens. I don't think that one series should define Kobe in any way, but let's at least be real about it.

[PaulieWal]

So let me get this straight. Thinking Kobe is around #6 is "outrageous" when the consensus outside RealGM has him in the same area? Yet putting him outside the Top 10 is "typical".

For the record I think Kobe is a top 10 player and I have him at 10. I would be okay with him being anywhere from 8-10 with reasonable justification. The "consensus" is not really meaningful when it consists of casual fans and ESPN analysts. The "consensus" also ranks Bird as a top 6 player but he is about to fall to #10 in this project.

[An Unbiased Fan]

Secondly, you probably didn't watch much or any of the 2004 Finals. Do you remember just what kind of impact the Malone injury had? When you have a prime tag team of Ben and Rasheed Wallace on Shaq, and a prime Tayshaun Prince on Kobe, it's going to be a tough matchup regardless. Had Shaq and Kobe been on the absolute same page playing as best they could, they would have STILL lost. That was the 1 Finals where the Lakers simply ran into a better team. Blaming that on Kobe's character issues alone?

I watched every minute of the 2004 Finals so I hope I can comment. But mainly I just want to mention that if I were trying to make a pro-Kobe case I wouldn't suggest that being guarded by Tayshaun Prince means Kobe is helpless to play well. Prince was a decent player, and a decent defender, but....please don't call this prime Prince when it was only his 2nd year in the league and he only played 435 minutes as a rookie so he was still a very inexperienced defender. His length had an impact, and obviously the Pistons played great team defense, but Kobe had plenty of good lucks. He was just off.

It happens. I don't think that one series should define Kobe in any way, but let's at least be real about it.

The reason LA sucked was because no one outside Shaq/Kobe scored in double digits until game 5. Brown threw 2 guys at Kobe whenever he made a move at the basket, and they dared the roleplayers to produce...which they didn't. It's honestly no mystery. Had GP played worth a damn, or Malone been healthy, then that series could have been different. But props to Detroit for a great gameplan.

I also don't think Phil get's enough blame, since his total lack of adjustments was the main reason they weren't even competitive. he mailed that series in.

[Reservoirdawgs]

Wait when did Iverson win a defensive award?

Yikes, I misread his Wikipedia page. Good catch, I'll edit that out .

[Colbinii]

In general, RealGM's opinions on Kobe are so over the top, that the consensus view gets you labelled a "Kobe fan". You basically can't say he's a good scorer, defender, champion, or much of anything on the PC board without 5+ posters decending on a thread to tell you how wrong you are, and how he sucks. It's kinda comical, like mentioning Bushs name on a Democratic forum, or Obama on a conservative forum..

This isn't true at all. The only reason Kobe get's negative view on this site is because we have trolls like exodus and other posters who try and compare Kobe to players that are a tier or two above Kobe. If you were to compare Kobe to players in his same tier, then we could have a great discussion. The problem is some people on this forum, and they know who they are, try to compare Kobe to top 5 players, when that is laughable.

Back to the thread, I would vote Bird here, although I have both Bird and Kobe inside my top 10 it is a shame that one will be left out.

[MacGill]

Secondly, you probably didn't watch much or any of the 2004 Finals. Do you remember just what kind of impact the Malone injury had? When you have a prime tag team of Ben and Rasheed Wallace on Shaq, and a prime Tayshaun Prince on Kobe, it's going to be a tough matchup regardless. Had Shaq and Kobe been on the absolute same page playing as best they could, they would have STILL lost. That was the 1 Finals where the Lakers simply ran into a better team. Blaming that on Kobe's character issues alone?

I watched every minute of the 2004 Finals so I hope I can comment. But mainly I just want to mention that if I were trying to make a pro-Kobe case I wouldn't suggest that being guarded by Tayshaun Prince means Kobe is helpless to play well. Prince was a decent player, and a decent defender, but....please don't call this prime Prince when it was only his 2nd year in the league and he only played 435 minutes as a rookie so he was still a very inexperienced defender. His length had an impact, and obviously the Pistons played great team defense, but Kobe had plenty of good lucks. He was just off.

It happens. I don't think that one series should define Kobe in any way, but let's at least be real about it.

The reason LA sucked was because no one outside Shaq/Kobe scored in double digits until game 5. Brown threw 2 guys at Kobe whenever he made a move at the basket, and they dared the roleplayers to produce...which they didn't. It's honestly no mystery. Had GP played worth a damn, or Malone been healthy, then that series could have been different. But props to Detroit for a great gameplan.

I also don't think Phil get's enough blame, since his total lack of adjustments was the main reason they weren't even competitive. he mailed that series in.

So part of the reason why to you that Kobe is > than LBJ is because he makes his teammates better, such a great facilitator...yet, in this series only, throwing 2 guys at him, which Kobe had never dealt with before completely threw him off his game???

All I hear from you is how he was LA's facilatator but now you state that they needed GP or even KM? Dude Kobe/Shaq alone are more than enough to tip any scale and that series could have been much more competitive if egos were put aside. So nothing else around that time was going on then huh? And yes, Phil. He should never have been welcomed back to LA given his coaching performance.

[An Unbiased Fan]

In general, RealGM's opinions on Kobe are so over the top, that the consensus view gets you labelled a "Kobe fan". You basically can't say he's a good scorer, defender, champion, or much of anything on the PC board without 5+ posters decending on a thread to tell you how wrong you are, and how he sucks. It's kinda comical, like mentioning Bushs name on a Democratic forum, or Obama on a conservative forum..

This isn't true at all. The only reason Kobe get's negative view on this site is because we have trolls like exodus and other posters who try and compare Kobe to players that are a tier or two above Kobe. If you were to compare Kobe to players in his same tier, then we could have a great discussion. The problem is some people on this forum, and they know who they are, try to compare Kobe to top 5 players, when that is laughable.

Back to the thread, I would vote Bird here, although I have both Bird and Kobe inside my top 10 it is a shame that one will be left out.

There are no "tiers" for players. Rankings are largely based on the criteria used. It defeats the purpose of a comparison board to dismiss opinions that don't fit your own outright.

[DQuinn1575]

And I'm more than willing to try to quantify and adjust Mikan, Oscar Robertson, Julius Erving, Rick Barry, Moses Malone, and anyone else.

How would you go about quantifying and adjusting erving and (to a lesser extent) barry? This is something i've been struggling with as we get closer to erving, as I think his ABA years should be valued relatively highly.

Something like (numbers are examples only)

The ABA in 1970 was 5 points worse than the NBA, so deduct 1 point per player
The ABA in 1976 was 3 points worse than the NBA, so deduct .6 points per player

So instead of being plus 6 points, maybe Doctor J is plus 5.4 points -

remember examples only - I don't want to debate Doctor J or anyone else until they are nominated.

But when they are, I do want to debate - or express my opinions - on the subject.

http://www.apbr.org/oct2000.html

[ceiling raiser]

I have the vote as follows:

Larry Bird ((12) Baller2014, DQuinn1575, ClydeFrazier, Warspite, rich316. DHodgkins, acrossthecourt, trex_8063. ronnymac2, Moonbeam, ChuckTexas, DannyNoonan1221

Kobe (3) andrewww, GCPantalones, AnUnbiasedFan

Garnett (2) PCProductions, therealbig3

DRobinson (1) magicmerl

I voted for KG as well:

viewtopic.php?p=40765107#p40765107

[An Unbiased Fan]

So part of the reason why to you that Kobe is > than LBJ is because he makes his teammates better, such a great facilitator...yet, in this series only, throwing 2 guys at him, which Kobe had never dealt with before completely threw him off his game???

All I hear from you is how he was LA's facilatator but now you state that they needed GP or even KM? Dude Kobe/Shaq alone are more than enough to tip any scale and that series could have been much more competitive if egos were put aside. So nothing else around that time was going on then huh? And yes, Phil. He should never have been welcomed back to LA given his coaching performance.

Not sure what your'e even saying. What does LBJ/Kobe have to do with this? Kobe had 2 guys thrown at him in plenty of playoff series before, he just had a bad series, I don't see anyone arguing that. I was giving a reply to the questions of WHY the Lakers lost that series, which were numerous.

In general, people are talking about nonsense things in regards to Kobe, and not the actual comparisons like we had the first few pages of this thread.

[andrewww]

Secondly, you probably didn't watch much or any of the 2004 Finals. Do you remember just what kind of impact the Malone injury had? When you have a prime tag team of Ben and Rasheed Wallace on Shaq, and a prime Tayshaun Prince on Kobe, it's going to be a tough matchup regardless. Had Shaq and Kobe been on the absolute same page playing as best they could, they would have STILL lost. That was the 1 Finals where the Lakers simply ran into a better team. Blaming that on Kobe's character issues alone?

I watched every minute of the 2004 Finals so I hope I can comment. But mainly I just want to mention that if I were trying to make a pro-Kobe case I wouldn't suggest that being guarded by Tayshaun Prince means Kobe is helpless to play well. Prince was a decent player, and a decent defender, but....please don't call this prime Prince when it was only his 2nd year in the league and he only played 435 minutes as a rookie so he was still a very inexperienced defender. His length had an impact, and obviously the Pistons played great team defense, but Kobe had plenty of good lucks. He was just off.

It happens. I don't think that one series should define Kobe in any way, but let's at least be real about it.

Chuck, did I ever make an excuse that 2004 was an off series for either Shaq or Kobe? I was responding to what I feel was a vendetta-esq comment by an aformentioned poster.

MacGill made a comment that was calling those who for voted for Kobe as proposterous or as if we're being homers and not justifying our selection. We've all made great cases and everyone is entitled to their opinion. I was simply replying to the notion that UBF himself represents those who voted for Kobe as proposterous, as if we were discounting his negatives, which I can speak for myself I certainly haven't. Let's be real about it. If we're speaking clearly on results, then Kobe has as good a case as anyone at this juncture.

If you want me to name names, then I certainly will. I was trying to be civil but if you insist and are implying that I'm spewing nonsense, here goes.

1)Baller2014
2)RSCD3_
3)Colts18
4)Trex_8063
5)ReservoirDawg

It's not so much about who is getting voted in, but rather the nonsense and completey inaccurate stereotypes to justify one's selection that I am calling out.

I even read one post where Kobe was last on the list because he felt he gave his chance the least chance of winning a title, then if you look at the other 7 or 8 players nominated won a combined 7 rings while Kobe himself has 5. Like c'mon, it's cool if you don't think he's great enough to be in the discussion right now, but at least make speak factual evidence and be objective.