RealGM Top 100 List #13

[john248]

My official vote is for Kobe Bryant.

Vote: Kobe Bryant

Just some food for thought, but you've really made me second-guess my pick here. I certainly didn't want to be too shallow, but also didn't want to overanalyze who I should vote for, as like I've said before, I see a really good case for a few players here, not just West or Dirk (Kobe, Dr. J, Karl Malone or D-Rob all seem to have some pretty obvious things going for them), but West's case seems strong enough that I may seriously reconsider my vote.

Alright, Kobe voters, I'm going to try and make a more extensive comparison to Jerry West here.

Let's start with their basic stats- for West it's from 1962-1973, for Kobe it's from 2000-2010, so Prime for Prime.

Per game Regular season
West 28.2ppg 6.9apg 5.6rpg 55.7TS%, .47FTr
Kobe 28.1ppg 5.2apg 5.8rpg 55.7TS%, .396FTr

Per game Playoffs
West 30.1ppg 6.5apg 5.4rpg 54TS%, .431FTr
Kobe 27.8ppg 5.2apg 5.5rpg 54.5TS%, .361FTr

Looks pretty close. However, we all know that we have to adjust these stats to make a meaningful comparison.

Easiest one is rebounds. West played at a much higher pace with more rebounds available for him to grab due to league-wide lower FG%s. Kobe clearly has the edge here by a good margin.

Next, let's look at points. Pace adjusted, West's scoring volume goes down. However, I don't think that's all that there is to it. West spent almost the entirety of his prime playing along side Elgin Baylor, who despite scoring on inferior efficiency, always got more shots than West. When Baylor was out with injury, West was able to step up as a scorer and volume score with little issue. I complied these numbers by going through their game logs on BBref, so there may be errors in the data. I only go from 64 to 70 because 64 is when we get game logs, and after 70 Baylor fell off a cliff.

Year Record PPG in games w/o Baylor PPG for season
64- 2-0 37.5ppg, 28.7ppg
65- 0-4 28.7ppg, 31ppg
66- 6-7 35.8ppg, 31.3ppg
67- 4-3 32.6ppg, 28.7ppg
68- 1-1 22.5ppg, 26.3ppg
69- 4-2 29.2ppg, 25.9ppg
70- 16-10 36ppg, 31.2ppg
Total- 33-27 34ppg, 29.3ppg

PPG splits win/loss, starting in 1964
32/24.3
33.3/26.9
32.3/30.1
31.9/25.6
26.7/25.7
26.6/24.2
33.3/28.2
29/23.3
25.6/26.8
22.9/22.5

Generally, it appears to me that Jerry didn't appear to have an issue scoring more, and Jerry volume scoring more was a good thing for the Lakers.

I'd ask, "what makes you think that West couldn't volume score like Kobe?" You might say "maybe he could, but his efficiency would go down, and it's already even with Kobe, so he'd be an inferior volume scorer". Logical! But we have not adjusted his efficiency for era yet either!

All evidence suggests to me that West would have been even more efficient if he were so lucky as to play today.
First, you should adjust his TS% to reflect the different rules regarding free throws that existed up until 67 season (viewtopic.php?f=344&t=1277741).
Second you have to take into account that West had no 3 point line to take advantage of. Turning some of those long 2s into 3s would have certainly boosted his efficiency.
Third you have to take into account how the lack of a 3 point line lead to a significantly more cluttered lane. It was simply harder to get to the rim with so many bodies in the way.
Fourth, you have to take into account that players could get away with being a bit more physical than they were today, Kobe didn't see defenses that rough outside of when he was spanked in the Finals by the Pistons.

I know it's Kobe vs Malone right now, but I just wanted to respond anyways since you quoted me. I do feel Dr. J, Kobe, West, and Dirk are close here. It really just comes down to preferences and likely biases too. At least for myself, I just judge a player by how they did in their era with the information that I know. It's tough to compare players from different eras due to different rules, talent pool, and strategies. It's easy to say it was more physical in the past and just as easy to say scouting and strategies are improved now. I also don't try and project how a player from the past will do today because we're just making assumptions.

Back to West, I think he's phenomenal. I mainly went with Kobe because he can attack from multiple areas of the floor and do it well whether in the post or perimeter. My gut tells me that West might have been the better defender (better teammate), but Kobe was a great man defender and solid on help. El Gee posted WOWY stats for West several threads back; very impressive which made me view West more favorably than Robertson.

[Baller2014]

So many good Karl Malone arguments have gone unanswered in this thread. It's a real shame Karl Malone isn't getting more credit for his play. The guy beats Kobe at pretty much everything; peak, prime, O/D, longevity, intangibles, accolades, etc. I suspect if Karl Malone had just one ring things would be different.

On the plus side, at least people are talking about Karl Malone, which is good. Hopefully he gets fleshed out more soon. Once he and Dr J get in I'm going to have to sit down and have a long think about who to vote for next. Probably D.Rob, though Barkley, Dirk and Nash are coming up soon for me too.

[Gregoire]

Run-off vote: Karl Malone.

Better longevity, better defensive impact over the years, more effective scorer, but slightly worse at volume. Rebounding and durability going ot Karl too. I consider 90s era in average better than 00s, so this argument is pro-Malone too.

[penbeast0]

So many good Karl Malone arguments have gone unanswered in this thread. It's a real shame Karl Malone isn't getting more credit for his play. The guy beats Kobe at pretty much everything; peak, prime, O/D, longevity, intangibles, accolades, etc. I suspect if Karl Malone had just one ring things would be different.

On the plus side, at least people are talking about Karl Malone, which is good. Hopefully he gets fleshed out more soon. Once he and Dr J get in I'm going to have to sit down and have a long think about who to vote for next. Probably D.Rob, though Barkley, Dirk and Nash are coming up soon for me too.

Still not even considering the top 60s players like West . . .

[penbeast0]

West is 6'5" his listed height is in incorrect. Oscar is listed at 6'5" but he is taller than Scottie Pippen.

Yeah I agree about West.
I have recently seen a pic of West and Kobe standing shoulder to shoulder on the court and they appear to be practically the same height. Maybe a 1 inch edge to Kobe.
Also I think West has longer arms then Kobe. They looked crazy long in the pic.

Oscar taller then Pippen? That is surprising. He always appeared kind of short to me in pictures.

Pippen is skinnier and wears pinstripes. I had the opportunity to meet Oscar in a room with about 300 former and current NBA players. Oscar is a big man. For any player that played before the 80s its just best to add 2 inches. With West he said in a recent interview that he is still upset that he never got the listed height corrected. Anyone notice at the Espys that DrJ was bit bigger than Melo? Yet melo plays PF and DrJ is said to be too small to play SF today.

Run off vote for Kobe:

I just dont get the K Malone love although I think he was trashed undeservedly in the past

Someone on APBR did a study and for those players he was able to measure, the difference was a little under 1.5 inches so 1 to 2 inches would be more accurate. The trouble I have is I have had 2 computers die since then so I don't have the post anymore and can't remember the dates where they changed over to measuring with shoes . . . around 1970 or so for rookie measurements I think.

[MacGill]

Run-off Vote: Kobe Bryant

I was in-between Kobe and the Doctor but seeing how this is a run-off my vote goes to Kobe. Definitely some good arguments for KM but in the end when I look at the overall skill-set of each player, Kobe is more valuable to me given his more diverse offensive arsenal. And as I mentioned before, I will be voting for Dirk before KM from a PF standpoint so it doesn't make sense for me to vote KM in now.

Kobe has demonstrated over his career that he can be the #1 offensive anchor of a championship team, at times a lock-down defender per position, a nightmare match-up for opposing guards, facilitator, and play-maker. Now while each of these attributes may not have all happened at the same time, to me Kobe's game is more portable then KM's and partly this may be because we really only seen one style of play from KM (so may be a little unfair). However, I can't go based off 'perhaps' and with Kobe, we have seen how he can single handily take over games when he gets hot as arguably the greatest scorer ever when on fire. Sometimes this was to a fault but he was also a good rebounder per position and took the game as serious as anyone to ever play the game. In the end, his playoff performances sealed it for me however, I do believe this comparison to be fairly close overall.

[semi-sentient]

Here is a post from Lorak/DavidStern on Kobe's elimination game woes

Dr Mufasa,
you are talking about Karl's collapses, but lets look at some of Kobe's poor performances in elimination games:

2002 - G7 vs Kings (10/26 FG)
2003 - G6 vs Spurs (9/19 FG, 7 tov)
2004 - G5 vs Pistons (7/21 FG)
2006 - G7 vs Suns (no will to fight in 2nd half; lost 3-1 lead)
2008 - G6 vs Celtics (again no will to fight in 2nd half; 7/22 FG)
2009 - G7 vs Rockets (4/12 FG)
2010 - G7 vs Celtics (6/24 FG)
2011 - G4 vs Mavs

That's even worse than what Malone did.

The bolded games weren't poor performances.

Against the Kings in 2002, Kobe put up the following numbers:

30 pts (.493 ts%), 10 reb, 7 ast, 2 stl, 0 tov, +8, 121 oRtg, 100 dRtg

The only part of his stat line that you can say was "poor" was his fg%, but you still have to look deeper as he missed 2 or 3 put-back attempts (basically with Divac/Webber contesting), as well as taking (and missing) 2 bail out shots in the 1st half (both passes received late in the clock on broken plays which forced a difficult shot attempt). Kobe was taking great shots that game and attacking the basket hard (drew several fouls attacking Divac and fouled him out late in the 4th on a drive). He did miss a few easy shots near the basket, but he was also active on the offensive glass and that led to several put back opportunities / free throws. Overall it was a very good offensive game, he played with good poise and essentially took what the defense gave him. Christie was hounding him all game long as well, so it's not like he was going up against some garbage defender.

Defensively he was very good overall. Here is how his opponents did in that game:

Code: Select all

               POSS  PTS   FG     FT    OREB   AST   TOV
   -----------------------------------------------------
   Christie   39    2     1-3    0-0   1      1     2
   Jackson    31    10    5-6    0-0   0      0     0
   Bibby      29    9     2-6    5-6   0      0     2
   Turkoglu   3     2     1-1    0-0   0      0     0
   Webber     2     0     0-0    0-0   0      0     1
   Stojakovic 1     0     0-0    0-0   0      0     1
   -----------------------------------------------------
   Totals     105   23    9-16   5-6   1      1     6

Jackson had a good amount of success when Kobe was on him, but most of his scores came off screens from Pollard or Divac. There were 2 sequences where Kobe did fall asleep (1 layup, 1 uncontested shot from 20), but those were the only mistakes defensively he made when guarding Jackson. Kobe was mostly on Jackson to start the 4th, then switched to Bibby mid-way through the 4th and OT. The only thing that Bibby did well against Kobe was getting to the line, but looking at the replays 2 of the 3 calls were highly questionable on non-shot attempts (1 off the ball, another on a full court press). The only legit foul was when Kobe tripped him up on a drive trying to stay in front of him off a screen. Outside of that, Bibby only got 1 clean shot attempt and that came in OT as Kobe had to ease up due to having 5 fouls. Every other shot was well contested, and Bibby had a lot of difficulty penetrating against Kobe or getting off clean passes.

There's no way anyone can call this game a poor performance.

I already spoke to Kobe's G7 against the Suns in 2006 (went play-by-play in the 3rd quarter) in a previous thread so I'm not going to rehash that here. I find it odd that "lost 3-1 lead" is brought up though. Had the Lakers managed to grab a rebound at the end of game 6 (gave up 2 offensive rebounds) then the perception of Kobe in that series would change dramatically considering how he performed in defeat.

As for Kobe's G7 against the Rockets in 2009, I don't have any play-by-play analysis, but I can tell you that both Gasol and Bynum had it going that game so he mostly got out of the way and allowed them to dominate the post. I thought he played great defense as well. I think people forget that this game was a blowout that seemed over by the half, so Kobe not being aggressive and looking for his doesn't mean it was a poor performance. It certainly wasn't a great game or anything, but to call it a poor performance is completely false.

2008 - G6 vs Celtics (again no will to fight in 2nd half; 7/22 FG)

That's quite an exaggeration. The Lakers were down by 23 points at the half and Kobe had 8 points in the 3rd quarter (8 fga, 2 fta). They headed into the 4th quarter down by 29 points with Kobe on the bench. He checked back in at the 9 minute mark (played only 6 minutes) and took a few more shots, but the game was already well out of reach. Claiming that Kobe had "no will to fight" is outlandish at best. How many players are going to go balls to the wall down 30 points with 9 minutes left in the 4th quarter?

...

As for the others, yeah, they were poor performances in terms of box score production. I'd have to revisit some of those games though because context is definitely important. When you lose by 30+ points I don't think you can really pin that on one player, and I don't necessarily agree that a player should go out swinging when the game is completely out of reach. If he does, great. A blowout is still a blowout though, so good or bad if what he's out there doing doesn't have a positive impact then it really doesn't matter at the end of the day.

[RSCD3_]

I'm voting Kobe Bryant

I thought his overall impact was pretty close to Oscar and he had slightly better longevity.

He has one of the greatest offensive skill sets. He has excelled as a first and second option. He is an underrated playmaker when he is focused. His defense was elite or near elite for his position from 99-04 and 08-10. That's near 9 seasons of above average defense. He is capable of leading good offenses with Below average support and capable of supplementing good defenses when he has a nice supporting cast on offense.






Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[FJS]

Other of the facts Karl Malone should be electer sooner than later is:

4th in Total games: 1476
2nd in Total Minutes: 54852
2nd in FG made: 13528
1st in FT made: 9787
1st in Defensive Rebounds: 11406
10th in Steals: 2085
2nd in Total Points: 36928

This talk about his amazing longetivity. Not only he played almost every game. He played almost every minute and produced in all of them in a high rate.

[Texas Chuck]

Other of the facts Karl Malone should be electer sooner than later is:

4th in Total games: 1476
2nd in Total Minutes: 54852
2nd in FG made: 13528
1st in FT made: 9787
1st in Defensive Rebounds: 11406
10th in Steals: 2085
2nd in Total Points: 36928

This talk about his amazing longetivity. Not only he played almost every game. He played almost every minute and produced in all of them in a high rate.

I know its popular on this forum to knock "counting" stats. And its in vogue to call all production outside of a narrowly defined "prime" as nothing more than "Stat-padding"(no matter how much they are helping their actual team at the time). Im glad you posted this.

But at some point we do need to look at guys like Karl Malone whose numbers are so great especially when you consider what a freaking ironman he really was. Those are huge numbers and they were all put up on winning teams so none of it is empty numbers.

He's not the most talented basketball player ever, but when you consider the total production he gave his team he has almost no peers.

[MacGill]

Chuck, how do you sum up Karl vs Dirk? If already posted, could you post me to the link? thx

[Texas Chuck]

Chuck, how do you sum up Karl vs Dirk? If already posted, could you post me to the link? thx

yeah I really haven't done so yet. If Kobe wins this I will post something in more detail in the next thread.

But a quick summary is both guys were consistently great for at least a decade, and while Dirk has another couple solid seasons outside of that, Karl has close to another decade of really solid play.

I'd give the RS edge to Karl Malone without much problems. Both guys had great team success with Dallas getting the one title, but the Jazz never missed the playoffs when Malone played. Malone had a better sidekick with Stockton as opposed to Dirk with Nash/JET, but 3-12(15) Dirk probably had better rosters. Sloan is a better coach than Nellie/Avery but Rick more than holds his own imo.

I'm higher on Malone's PS play than most, but Dirk gets the playoff edge for me. Just more consistently solid. When you look at the series the Mavs were eliminated in, outside of 07 GSW and 14 SAS its hard to find much fault with Dirk. He was hurt by Nash and JET especially underperforming most years in the playoffs.

If you ask me who the better player is at their best, I think its Dirk. But is he enough better to make up for those extra years? It's pretty close, but I think yes especially since I think he is an elite offensive anchor and an elite play-off performer.

Will flesh this out more in the next thread (and maybe come to a different conclusion once I've looked closer)

[ardee]

Other of the facts Karl Malone should be electer sooner than later is:

4th in Total games: 1476
2nd in Total Minutes: 54852
2nd in FG made: 13528
1st in FT made: 9787
1st in Defensive Rebounds: 11406
10th in Steals: 2085
2nd in Total Points: 36928

This talk about his amazing longetivity. Not only he played almost every game. He played almost every minute and produced in all of them in a high rate.

I did NOT know Karl was first in defensive rebounds.

Wow, that's an eye-opener.

And I echo Chuck's sentiments, this is a pertinent point. People act as if Kareem's 38,387 means nothing... Well, it's one of the main reasons why he's a consensus top 4 player on pretty much everyone's lists.

[90sAllDecade]

In comparing Kobe and Karl offensively, both are great volume scorers. Kobe has better range naturally due to position, but with Dirk in the earlier comparisons, Kobe is better with his shooting skill set. Both have a post game, both are good passers with Kobe having an advantage imo. Karl is the better offensive rebounder and overall, although Kobe is a good rebounder for a guard, Malone is clearly better here.

Efficiency wise Karl is better, but a very large amount of his shots are assisted with data available for his later years. This doesn't include when Stockton played more minutes in his prime enhancing Malone's game. I think Karl greatly benefited from John and much like Oscar, Nash and Magic; Stockton made his big men better offensively than they really would be without him.

Kobe didn't have a great PG setting him up, he did have Shaq, Gasol and Phil Jackson to help take off pressure and put him in a system to succeed. But he was dominant offensively without all three individually, including the playoffs with Phil and Odom as the #1 focal point for defenses. Karl Malone also had Jerry Sloan helping him with his system throughout almost his entire prime. Kobe also played in a league with lower TS% on average, so he was good there as well in context. I have to give the edge to Kobe here.

Defensively, Karl is excellent. Great post defense, man defense and a very tough, intelligent player. No real vertical game and not a true defensive anchor (but neither was Bryant). Kobe was an excellent man and perimeter defender in his younger years, prime and some other years he was a quality defender. He was overrated in later years and gave more effort offensively certain years when he had to shoulder a heavier load. Both would often guard the best offensive threat relative to their positions when necessary.

I don't overly weigh RAPM or +/- stats because they can have lineup noise to some degree, despite attempts to minimize it. Honestly I value Synergy stats more for ranking individual players, although neither are perfect and both have value. If Synergy and BBreference got together that would make these individual comparisons easier, especially on the defensive end for me.

Defense is more impactful to PF and offense is more impactul to SG, so since Karl isn't a true defensive anchor like Garnett, DRob, Olajuwon etc. and Kobe is the better offensive player at his position and was a very good defensive SG as well over his career, it is a wash to me.

I hold peak and longevity equally (with players of decent longevity of course, I don't use the extreme Bill Walton example) and Kobe's peak with Malone's incredible longevity wash out considering Kobe had played many productive years as well.

Both had excellent team support, HOF coaches but I would give the edge to Kobe. Again I don't rank individual players on team based accomplishments, stats or accolades/resume.


So these two players are very close and it has to come down to little things or tie breakers for me, even this was difficult. Neither had real weakness in their games (other than not being defensive anchors), both were highly skilled although I give the edge to Kobe and both maximized their talent with a relentless work ethic. Both were mentally strong and I don't think they really hurt their team success with character issues. Even though they disliked each other Kobe still won rings with Shaq and later without him with Gasol. I wouldn't say Kobe's disposition kept him from succeeding, he was incredibly focused. Karl had cheap shots and immoral choices but he was laser focused as well, which was showcased in his incredible consistency over the years.

The tie breaker for me was individual playoff performance. Kobe stayed the same when he faced playoff pressures and Malone got worse. Defensively both rose to the occasion with Malone and Kobe both doing great jobs on top offensive players to help win or increase the chances of winning a series.

But offensively Karl consistently got worse. And this wasn't a case of someone's B game in the playoffs still being better than another's improved A game in the post season. His offensive game in the playoffs was worse overall than Kobe's when things got tougher against playoff teams.

So considering all of this, my runoff vote goes to Kobe Bryant.

[Basketballefan]

So many good Karl Malone arguments have gone unanswered in this thread. It's a real shame Karl Malone isn't getting more credit for his play. The guy beats Kobe at pretty much everything; peak, prime, O/D, longevity, intangibles, accolades, etc. I suspect if Karl Malone had just one ring things would be different.

Malone definitely didn't peak higher than Kobe, nor does he have him beat in accolades not even close. Stop ignoring 5 rings at a high level to 0 for Malone. And that's not ring counting, Kobe played at a higher level in some of those runs than Karl ever did in the playoffs. As for Longevity yes Malone has him beat but it's not by an enormous margin.

[shutupandjam]

Other of the facts Karl Malone should be electer sooner than later is:

4th in Total games: 1476
2nd in Total Minutes: 54852
2nd in FG made: 13528
1st in FT made: 9787
1st in Defensive Rebounds: 11406
10th in Steals: 2085
2nd in Total Points: 36928

This talk about his amazing longetivity. Not only he played almost every game. He played almost every minute and produced in all of them in a high rate.

I did NOT know Karl was first in defensive rebounds.

Wow, that's an eye-opener.

And I echo Chuck's sentiments, this is a pertinent point. People act as if Kareem's 38,387 means nothing... Well, it's one of the main reasons why he's a consensus top 4 player on pretty much everyone's lists.

Keep in mind they didn't record defensive rebounds until 1974. Using my estimates, Karl would be #4 on that list after Wilt, Russell, and Kareem. Regardless, it's still amazing, and the overall point doesn't change: Karl's longevity was incredible.

[Owly]

I'll semi-echo the sentiment above Malone's longevity matters.

But it doesn't matter purely on counting stats but the quality that came with it.

Elvin Hayes has a somewhat superficially similar career. But he got his points on very poor efficiency and he played in a faster era and so advanced metrics show that he was never an exceptional player (never breaking into the 20s in PER, and WS/48 peaking at .173 which he had twice, but was usually quite a bit worse). And in that context having a lot of points isn't that valuable. Throw in negative intangiables and you've got a less than elite career.

So it's not the longevity or the raw numbers by themselves but the quality combined with longevity (that is the prime that that was sustained for most of his career) which result in big totals (but as noted broadly similar numbers could be obtained by gunning and fortune with regard to pace).

[Doctor MJ]

Runoff Vote: Karl Malone

So yeah, you probably expected it was coming. Sorry. Rather hoping Kobe takes it, but I have to give Karl the nod.

My reasons are also predictable, so if they don't convince you, rest assured that everyone else gets the reasoning already too, and if they weren't convinced before, they almost certainly won't be now.

So, thing is about Kobe that I don't really believe he was a night & day impactor in the Shaq era. I'll certainly give Kobe such credit for the '01 playoffs given that I think the only way that works is if everything is absolutely in sync, but in general, and to my surprise, the night & day guy was basically always Shaq.

Once things re-grouped after Shaq left, Kobe emerged as such a player, but not until then. And between that, and the fact that I'm not a huge fan of his performance in the '10s, his superstar longevity isn't as-good-as-it gets. It's not something I'd really factor in in most cases because it's plenty good compared to most, but Karl is arguably the longevity GOAT among first options.

And to make it explicit: Yes, I think Malone was having superstar impact for a very long time. Not quite as long as some thing, but certainly more than a decade.

Now, a good question to ask is: But if Shaq was in the way of Kobe's impact, don't you have to consider what it would have been without him? What about if Malone had to defer to Shaq?

Absolutely, but the thing is, there's really no reason to think that a SG-C duo is going make the SG redundant. Inside-outside is a bit of a classic combo. As such, the fact that Kobe struggled to have more impact according to the +/- (along with all the strife that's documented off the court and on relating to Kobe being a remorseless gunslinger), does seem to say something about Kobe. It's not in and of itself a wholely bad thing, but sufficed to say that there are less talented guys I'd pick before Kobe if I were building a team around Shaq simply because they'd be more able to accept their secondary status and develop a role to max out impact in his wake.

As always some will point to the success of the 3-peat and scoff at the notion that this was a disappointment. That's their right. Know though that to the extent I have a bias here against Kobe, it began the same time my outright dislike of Shaq came: As an Angeleno Laker fan watching the drama the two of them caused gradually destroy something that to me had the talent to win far more than 3 titles. This fact certainly doesn't make me immune to accusations of being irrational, but just know that I'm not coming in after the fact and making up a reason to say Kobe was involved in a disappointment. Before I was ever on basketball message boards, I banged my head against the wall in frustration about these two stars.

And of note, if not of import, there is the matter that the last leg of that Laker era came in '03-04 when Payton and Malone came aboard. I watched that year wanting to throw things at Shaq and Kobe and Payton. They all acted like idiots. Malone was the only one of the bunch that came in with a proper attitude, and this despite the fact that he was the one asked to make the biggest sacrifice.

This has distinct relevance to this debate because it showed him doing what I think Kobe needed to do plenty of times in his career, and he just couldn't...which is not something I would have assumed before given his long career as an alpha.

[penbeast0]

I'm voting Kobe Bryant

I thought his overall impact was pretty close to Oscar and he had slightly better longevity.

He has one of the greatest offensive skill sets. He has excelled as a first and second option. He is an underrated playmaker when he is focused. His defense was elite or near elite for his position from 99-04 and 08-10. That's near 9 seasons of above average defense. He is capable of leading good offenses with Below average support and capable of supplementing good defenses when he has a nice supporting cast on offense.

The runoff is Kobe v. Karl Malone, not Kobe v. Oscar . . . however even without your vote, Kobe wins this

18 Kobe Bryant (GC Pantalones, ShaqAttack3234, ardee, batmana, JordansBulls, Basketballefan, DQuinn1575, john248, lukekarts, ronnymac2, 90sAllDecade, MacGill, SactoKingsFan, rich316, Quotatious, Chuck Texas, Moonbeam)

7 Karl Malone (Baller2014, therealbig3, trex_8063, magicmerl, FJS, Danny Noonan1221, Gregoire)

[tsherkin]

I'd love to cast my vote for Malone on this one. I like him as a player more than I do Kobe and I like the way he fits into teams more than I do with Bryant...

But Kobe's longevity is considerable, his individual performance significant and he was a notably better offensive performer in the postseason... which matters a lot to me due to the fact that both of these guys were cast as primary volume scorers. Malone just got so much worse at that in the playoffs compared to his regular season work and his skill set didn't really translate to postseason dominance, whereas Kobe's mix of volume scoring, shot creation and playmaking suits the head of an offense a little more in my mind. I'll take the RS trade-off in favor of the postseason performance. They've both had their stinkers, but we're long past the world of the near-perfect performer (in so far as such even exists in the annals of NBA history) and into the world of men. Great ones even still, of course, and in this case, I think Kobe is the lead among those remaining.

I vote for Kobe Bryant