limbo wrote:
Kobe being rarely better than Dirk doesn't mean that they weren't close in a lot of the years. It just means that during their primes, there was only a handful of season where you could say Kobe was clearly better than Dirk, despite playing mostly on better teams.
What I'm saying is, you can say the same about Dirk's number of clearly better seasons, if we just look at overlapping prime seasons, he's generally going to get 02, 04, 05 and most will probably take 07 though some won't due to his playoff collapse. By 2011 Kobe was on the decline clearly. 06 is definitely not clearly Dirk, if you think so then maybe it's you looking too much at "winning", because we know Kobe's capabilities and that was a bad situation for him.
If they were close in most years, what's the problem with calling Kobe better overall?
limbo wrote:Calling out winning bias is not about dismissing winning. It's about putting the proper context/perspective on how/why a certain player won. And no, Kobe was the best player on two title teams while Dirk was only on one is not context/perspective...
Isiah Thomas was the best player on two title teams but that doesn't make him a better player than either Oscar, West, Paul, Nash or Stockton... That's not me saying Isiah had 'nothing to do with' Pistons titles, no, he was one of their most important players, but i'm not going to be putting him over superior players on a list that asks to rank individual players, because he wasn't as good. The reason why he won two rings and Oscar won one was because of other factors beyond their control, which i'm trying to eliminate as best as possible when i'm talking about GOAT rankings.
You're saying a bunch of stuff everybody already knows though. Kobe's prime/peak ability speaks for itself, and he has a robust resume with a litter of great playoff performances to back it up, so someone saying he was better than Dirk isn't some hot take. You seem to be equating them to two different level of players, like we're comparing Lillard against Curry or something. Or KD against Lebron. It's not reality.
limbo wrote:I'm not giving 03 to Kobe... Dirk had a +12.6 OnCourt and +20.4 On/Off during the RS compared to Kobe's +3.8 OnCourt and +10.0 On/Off... Dirk had better RAPM and better advanced stats too, not by much, but enough.
Dirk's advacned stats weren't really better they are about the same. For example, Dirk slightly ahead in BPM but behind in PER. Kobe appeared to create more on offense though, averaging 30 ppg and 6 apg on a respectable 55 ts% on a 32.9 usage%. I understand Dirk makes up most of the gap with his creation through spacing, but Dirk fans at times seem to exaggerate this to mythical levels. Dirk aside from maybe a year or two in his prime always had decent or even very good ball handlers to make plays for others. Let's be real, Kobe's basically never had that. Fisher is not that guy.
limbo wrote:Kobe doesn't even have the better Playoff performance. He beat up on below average Minnesota defense in the 1st round before being clamped by the Spurs. His Spurs series was not more impressive than Dirk was in terms of the impact he was having, despite playing more games and on a better team. Dirk at least eliminated the Kings in those Playoffs, who were the 2nd team based on SRS during the RS and he played good in that series, despite Webber getting injured. You're basically rewarding Kobe because Dirk got injured mid-way through the Spurs series... Despite Dirk playing more PS games overall and performing better in them against tougher defenses...There's nothing Kobe showed me during that PS that makes me put him ahead of Dirk who was simply better during the RS.
Not really sure how you figure the Spurs clamped Kobe. He probably overshot a little bit, but he didn't freeze teammates out in the same way he did in 04. Should probably also be worth noting that a lot their players as a whole were worn down from 3 straight finals runs. You don't factor that in at all?
BTW i wouldn't mention Dirk's play against San Antonio. He had a great game, a meh game and a poor game. Duncan was eating his lunch and would've continued to if he didn't get hurt.
limbo wrote:Haha. So, let me get this straight. Kobe was comfortably better in 03, despite having a worse RS and not really doing anything of note against non below-average defenses in the PS, because Dirk got injured. But in 06, Dirk has a legendary postseason run all the way to the Finals while Kobe almost averages the same number of assists and has a worse series against the same Suns Dirk beats later on and 06 is a wash... LMAO
I think i explained 03 good enough. Kobe had one of his better regular seasons, the results weren't really impressive but he was playing with an unmotivated and tired supporting cast.
You keep saying how you want to apply context but you keep failing to do so. Kobe's team in 06 wasn't destined to do anything in the playoffs, and he pushed a better team to 7. I think that's arguably the peak for both players, it just so happens Kobe was in one of the worst possible situations, and Dirk didn't have a great cast but a good one at least. I'm not going to judge Kobe harshly in one of his worst situations. Again, i have no problem picking either.
limbo wrote:08-10 is Kobe's strongest stretch of his career and Dirk is a lot closer to Kobe in those years than Kobe is to Dirk outside of those years, despite Dirk playing on a mediocre team at best, while Kobe had arguably the best supporting cast in the league.
I fully believe Kobe could've performed the same way from 06-10 if he had good enough supporting casts. Kobe didn't magically become a different player in the late 2000s. He was hurt, had a down year in 05, and had issues with Shaq and that rape case going on in 04 so there's that. Kobe's had to put up with way more variables over his career than Dirk did, who basically every year had at least a solid cast.
limbo wrote:There is no 'what if's' here... Dirk was individually a better basketball player than Kobe on aggregate from 00-14. All metrics say this. Why that hasn't manifested in more team success/titles is a different debate, but not really much of a debate, because everybody knows Kobe played with the best supporting cast in the league from 2000 to 2004 and 2008-2011, while Dirk not so much.
Well i don't think impact metrics are a one size fits all type of approach to ranking players. It seems you're trying to explain away Kobe's career full of long success just because he had sometimes great teams. Kobe's a case where impact stuff usually underrates him, while Dirk is probably properly rated by his.
Also we don't know how well Dirk and Shaq would've gotten along. Shaq was a bit of a dick, would he have been so nice to a lanky white dude who shoots a ton of jumpers, and who at that time was young and unproven? Who knows. It's easy to say they would've in hindsight but remember, his peak would be overlapping with pre or early prime Dirk, not the Dirk he knows today.
I don't even care that you take Dirk, it seems reasonable enough but i don't understand this attitude of trying to diminish and disrespect Kobe's legacy by calling Dirk the clear better player is sort of head scratching.
