Lowest reasonable ranking for Kobe Bryant?

[Dutchball97]

One thing to clear up is that I, nor any of the other people in this thread arguing Kobe is not a top 10 player of all time, think that Kobe was an inefficient chucker or bad player.

In fact I have him 11th and have often had arguments against other posters here defending him against Kevin Garnett. I simply fail to see how thinking players like Larry Bird or Hakeem Olajuwon being just a bit better than Kobe Bryant is this hugely disrespectful statement against Kobe that is only brought about by blind hate.

[LAL1947]

The lowest ranking for Kobe is 10 because you feel uncomfortable having Kobe outside the top 10. Sounds like literally the only thing you're basing your argument on is your personal bias towards Kobe.

It's not because I feel uncomfortable with having Kobe outside the top 10. It's because he's the 2nd greatest back-court player of all time... and arguably the most skilled of all time. How can you downplay that because he was a lesser version of MJ? These same people put Tim Duncan in the top 10 partly because he was "the greatest Power Forward"... while neglecting that there has never been a Power Forward who is on the same level as MJ ever. I really should start classifying Hakeem as a Power Forward from this point on, so that he can be the best Power Forward in the Top 10. It's a very disingenuous thing that people do... dismiss Kobe for being slightly less than Mike, the greatest player ever... but don't dismiss Duncan for being even further away from bigs like Wilt/Kareem/Hakeem... by using "best Power Forward" as an excuse.

Also on one hand you put a major emphasis on individual numbers (hence MJ and Wilt being the only ones you see above Kobe) but then turn around and talk about Kobe's team success as a reason for ranking him this high. You're not consistent within your own criteria and just pick and choose what to value based on whether or not it benefits Kobe.

I'm putting a major emphasis on individual numbers only with Wilt... because I don't feel I have the right to strip away the individual records he has set. Players have had ample time and opportunity to break his records, yet many still stand to this day.

With Mike, I feel he is the greatest because of his combination of elite individual skill + elite athleticism, that's the main thing... which he was able to translate into all of the victories, accomplishments, scoring records, etc.

People seem to like dismissing all of the things he was able to do, just like with Kobe. For example, there is a thread comparing MJ vs Dirk as mid-range "scorers" and some are saying that Dirk was a better "mid-range scorer" because they've reduced "mid-range scoring" purely to shooting. Doing this helps them ignore so much of MJ's game... so they can argue Dirk over him in a category that they've now "dumbed down". Some even concluded that "MJ had to work harder to get his points", lol, instead of accepting that Dirk just didn't have MJ's skills as a player + scorer. I don't understand how this conclusion was made but I understand why... making the immortals seem mortal so the mortals don't feel so bad, in a manner of speaking.

[Dutchball97]

The lowest ranking for Kobe is 10 because you feel uncomfortable having Kobe outside the top 10. Sounds like literally the only thing you're basing your argument on is your personal bias towards Kobe.

It's not because I feel uncomfortable with having Kobe outside the top 10. It's because he's the 2nd greatest front-court player of all time... and arguably the most skilled of all time. How can you downplay that because he was a lesser version of MJ? These same people put Tim Duncan in the top 10 because he was "the greatest Power Forward" of all time... and neglect to factor in that there was not and has not been a Power Forward who was on the same level as MJ. I really should start classifying Hakeem as a Power Forward from this point on, so that he can be the best Power Forward in the Top 10. It's a very disingenuous thing that people do. Dismiss Kobe for being slightly less than Mike, the greatest player ever... but don't dismiss Duncan for being even further away from bigs like Wilt/Kareem/Hakeem... by using "best Power Forward" as an excuse.

This is once again based on nothing but your personal subjective opinion. I've seen you say Kobe is the 2nd best backcourt player (at least I assume front court here is just a typo) but can you give your reasoning for why you think Kobe is without a doubt better than Magic Johnson? What makes you so sure Kobe is better than Oscar and West as well?

People don't put Tim Duncan in the top 10 because he is the best PF of all-time. There are multiple posters here who'd even argue Duncan was more of a center than a PF and still have him firmly in their top 10, like 70sfan for example. You're now saying that Duncan is further removed from Wilt, Kareem and Hakeem than Kobe is from MJ based on what? I personally have Duncan ahead of both Wilt and Hakeem, while I'd certainly be willing to argue the gap between Kareem and Duncan is significantly smaller than the gap between MJ and Kobe.

In your previous post your argument for Duncan not being better than Kobe was "he just wasn't". Your opinion on how good someone was is based on the eye test and heavily (almost exclusively even) slanted to the offensive side of the ball. You've created a narrative for yourself that you can't seem to match with the opinions of people on here so by default everyone else must be wrong.

[CBS7]

I love both Kobe and Dirk but seen a few people say its reasonable to rate Dirk over Kobe. I just don't see how.

I have Kobe around 10-11 on my list. Seeing some of these names makes me think Kobe is on the track to start becoming underrated on these boards.

[LAL1947]

This is once again based on nothing but your personal subjective opinion.

And what is your opinion, if not a personal subjective opinion too?

I've seen you say Kobe is the 2nd best backcourt player (at least I assume front court here is just a typo) but can you give your reasoning for why you think Kobe is without a doubt better than Magic Johnson? What makes you so sure Kobe is better than Oscar and West as well?

Yes, that was a typo, I've been going back and forth between this thread and the Hakeem vs Duncan one.

Can you name me one thing that Magic could do better as a back-court player apart from making assists and rebounding? Just one thing. Shoot? No. Score? No. Dribble? No. Post-up? No. Face-up? No. Handles? No. Drive to the hoop in half-court play? No. Finish at the rim in different ways? No. Use english? No. The style and control of Kobe when executing the repertoire of all his skills is on a different level to Magic's.

The overall sum of his level of individual skill displayed, style of play, accomplishments... make him a better back-court player than Oscar and West to me. Do you believe otherwise? If yes, do explain as I'm curious to learn what you think. I seem to be doing all the explaining... while you guys just make statements, that sometimes don't even make logical sense (whether because of a language barrier, I do not know).

Also... why do you never dismiss the strength of Magic's WHOLE squads... but dismiss Kobe for having Shaq, who you also say is less than Kareem, and a bunch of role-players?

People don't put Tim Duncan in the top 10 because he is the best PF of all-time.

There are plenty who use this as the starting point or basis for their argument, even if they don't fully realize it.

There are multiple posters here who'd even argue Duncan was more of a center than a PF and still have him firmly in their top 10, like 70sfans for example. You're now saying that Duncan is further removed from Wilt, Kareem and Hakeem than Kobe is from MJ based on what? I personally have Duncan ahead of both Wilt and Hakeem, while I'd certainly be willing to argue the gap between Kareem and Duncan is significantly smaller than the gap between MJ and Kobe.

This is your personal subjective opinion. Kobe won 2 titles without Shaq over a Duncan (who you say is better than Kobe and top 10 all-time, better than Wilt/Hakeem too) who had a better squad... and a Dirk (who you said today is a better mid-range scorer than MJ) and also had a better squad. So how come you forget what you say about Duncan and Dirk when it comes to giving Kobe importance for those 2 titles? If Kobe was actually lesser than these two in the way you say he was, yet won those titles despite having lesser squads... then those titles should be among the most incredible wins ever, right?

In your previous post your argument for Duncan not being better than Kobe was "he just wasn't". Your opinion on how good someone was is based on the eye test and heavily (almost exclusively even) slanted to the offensive side of the ball. You've created a narrative for yourself that you can't seem to match with the opinions of people on here so by default everyone else must be wrong.

Of course it is heavily slanted to the offensive side of the ball. That is the pinnacle of skill, especially when comparing players on an individual level. You guys have started doing a comparison of players at their peak, right? I don't understand why anyone would want to compare players of lesser skill and leave those with greater skill out... especially since "a peak" means the height. Here again, I feel Kobe being a lesser version of MJ (the greatest ever to do it) is held against him subconsciously.

[sansterre]

Would it be an accurate summary of your position that Kobe should be ranked higher than Duncan because Kobe was more skilled than Duncan?

[Dutchball97]

This is once again based on nothing but your personal subjective opinion.

And what is your opinion, if not a personal subjective opinion too?

I've seen you say Kobe is the 2nd best backcourt player (at least I assume front court here is just a typo) but can you give your reasoning for why you think Kobe is without a doubt better than Magic Johnson? What makes you so sure Kobe is better than Oscar and West as well?

Yes, that was a typo, I've been going back and forth between this thread and the Hakeem vs Duncan one.

Can you name me one thing that Magic could do better as a back-court player apart from making assists and rebounding? Just one thing. Shoot? No. Score? No. Dribble? No. Post-up? No. Face-up? No. Handles? No. Drive to the hoop in half-court play? No. Finish at the rim in different ways? No. Use english? No. The style and control of Kobe when executing the repertoire of all his skills is on a different level to Magic's.

The overall sum of his level of individual skill displayed, style of play, accomplishments... make him a better back-court player than Oscar and West to me. Do you believe otherwise? If yes, do explain as I'm curious to learn what you think. I seem to be doing all the explaining... while you guys just make statements, that sometimes don't even make logical sense (whether because of a language barrier, I do not know).

Also... why do you never dismiss the strength of Magic's WHOLE squads... but dismiss Kobe for having Shaq, who you also say is less than Kareem, and a bunch of role-players?

People don't put Tim Duncan in the top 10 because he is the best PF of all-time.

There are plenty who use this as the starting point or basis for their argument, even if they don't fully realize it.

There are multiple posters here who'd even argue Duncan was more of a center than a PF and still have him firmly in their top 10, like 70sfans for example. You're now saying that Duncan is further removed from Wilt, Kareem and Hakeem than Kobe is from MJ based on what? I personally have Duncan ahead of both Wilt and Hakeem, while I'd certainly be willing to argue the gap between Kareem and Duncan is significantly smaller than the gap between MJ and Kobe.

This is your personal subjective opinion. Kobe won 2 titles without Shaq over a Duncan (who you say is better than Kobe and top 10 all-time, better than Wilt/Hakeem too) who had a better squad... and a Dirk (who you said today is a better mid-range scorer than MJ) and also had a better squad. So how come you forget what you say about Duncan and Dirk when it comes to giving Kobe importance for those 2 titles? If Kobe was actually lesser than these two in the way you say he was, yet won those titles despite having lesser squads... then those titles should be among the most incredible wins ever, right?

In your previous post your argument for Duncan not being better than Kobe was "he just wasn't". Your opinion on how good someone was is based on the eye test and heavily (almost exclusively even) slanted to the offensive side of the ball. You've created a narrative for yourself that you can't seem to match with the opinions of people on here so by default everyone else must be wrong.

Of course it is heavily slanted to the offensive side of the ball. That is the pinnacle of skill, especially when comparing players on an individual level. You guys have started doing a comparison of players at their peak, right? I don't understand why anyone would want to compare players of lesser skill and leave those with greater skill out... especially since "a peak" means the height. Here again, I feel Kobe being a lesser version of MJ (the greatest ever to do it) is held against him subconsciously.

My opinion is always going to be subjective as well of course. I'm not trying to argue my opinion has higher authority than your opinion or anything. The thing is I do try to substantiate my opinions with stats and more importantly I'm open to having my opnion changed by other people when they bring good arguments to the table that are based on something outside of their own personal interpretation of what they see on screen. I feel like you're so set on Kobe being better than the likes of Duncan and Magic you aren't willing to listen to what counterarguments people bring to the table. You don't have to change your opinion afterwards, it is perfectly fine to have Kobe ahead of Duncan and Magic, but starting off by saying "he's just better" without really going deeper than that does seem in bad faith.

Another thing that can be seen from your reply here is that you react as if Kobe gets massively disrespected anytime someone thinks another player is better than them. Magic vs Kobe is a discussion worth having imo even if I believe Magic did more towards winning than Kobe did over his career. This doesn't mean that people conveniently forget Magic played with Kareem and in the same breath dismiss Kobe's first 3 rings for playing next to Shaq. The dynamics are different though as Kareem was firmly on the decline when Magic established himself as a truely elite player around 1985, while Kobe really only reached his prime in 03 imo and was the clearly inferior player for most of the time when he played together with Shaq. Even then I did not bring this up as an argument nor have I seen anyone else here said Magic did not play with stacked teams himself.

Duncan carried the Spurs to a title in 2003 and I think you should know D-Rob was a shell of his former self, while both Manu and Parker contributed very little at that point. You on the other hand have continuously been downplaying Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom to prop up Kobe's 09 and 10 titles. Dirk's supporting cast in 2011 really wasn't much to write home about either and definitely not better than Kobe's casts for his 4th and 5th ring. I've also seen you be quite butthurt about the Dirk vs MJ mid-range thread for some reason but the only thing I said is lay-ups and dunks aren't part of the mid-range. Dirk is literally the best mid-range shooter of the last 25 years so if you can't compare him to MJ solely in terms of mid-range, that means you'd get offended at anyone being compared to MJ period. Besides that I have Duncan ahead of Kobe but Dirk below both of them so you can quit the "he's just against Kobe" attitude. Not everyone who ranks Kobe lower than you hates him or has an agenda against him. It is incredibly annoying when I've literally taken Kobe's side here in arguments multiple times but am now painted as some Kobe hater because I don't see him as literal basketball Jesus.

The skill part I don't agree with. Like at all. It is way easier to learn to shoot or dribble than it is to defend imo. It not being as aesthetically pleasing really doesn't have anything to do with the difficulty and skill required.

[70sFan]

Can you name me one thing that Magic could do better as a back-court player apart from making assists and rebounding? Just one thing. Shoot? No. Score? No. Dribble? No. Post-up? No. Face-up? No. Handles? No. Drive to the hoop in half-court play? No. Finish at the rim in different ways? No. Use english? No.

Shooting at least is arguable, Magic was better FT shooter and peaked higher as a three point shooter. From what I've seen, Magic was also extremely efficient midrange shooter. 1985-91 Magic was elite shooter, he just had a different role than Kobe.

Scoring - yeah, there's no case for Magic.

Dribble - it's close, Magic seemed to have more control on high speed but Kobe could manipluate it better in iso.

Post up - Magic was definitely a better post player and it's not close. Much superior post passer and more dangerous scorer.

Face-up - I agree, Kobe is on another level.

Handles - don't see any difference between handles and dribbling.

Driving - Kobe is quicker and shifter, but Magic was bigger and better at drawing fouls. Again, it's close.

Finish at the rim - I don't have data to back it up, but I'd take a bet that Magic was a better inside finisher than Kobe. He was simply bigger and stronger than him. Besides, Magic's inside repertoire was also great - I've seen very few players having such a good touch on hooks, floaters, finger-rolls, push shots...

Use english - yeah, Kobe was better. I don't see this as significant though.

Of course you also focused heavily on scoring skills while rejecting whole another dimension and calling it "assists". Magic's playmaking was on absolutely another level and this is where the real gap exists.

[Strepbacter]

Can you name me one thing that Magic could do better as a back-court player apart from making assists and rebounding? Just one thing. Shoot? No. Score? No. Dribble? No. Post-up? No. Face-up? No. Handles? No. Drive to the hoop in half-court play? No. Finish at the rim in different ways? No. Use english? No.

Shooting at least is arguable, Magic was better FT shooter and peaked higher as a three point shooter. From what I've seen, Magic was also extremely efficient midrange shooter. 1985-91 Magic was elite shooter, he just had a different role than Kobe.

Scoring - yeah, there's no case for Magic.

Dribble - it's close, Magic seemed to have more control on high speed but Kobe could manipluate it better in iso.

Post up - Magic was definitely a better post player and it's not close. Much superior post passer and more dangerous scorer.

Face-up - I agree, Kobe is on another level.

Handles - don't see any difference between handles and dribbling.

Driving - Kobe is quicker and shifter, but Magic was bigger and better at drawing fouls. Again, it's close.

Finish at the rim - I don't have data to back it up, but I'd take a bet that Magic was a better inside finisher than Kobe. He was simply bigger and stronger than him. Besides, Magic's inside repertoire was also great - I've seen very few players having such a good touch on hooks, floaters, finger-rolls, push shots...

Use english - yeah, Kobe was better. I don't see this as significant though.

Of course you also focused heavily on scoring skills while rejecting whole another dimension and calling it "assists". Magic's playmaking was on absolutely another level and this is where the real gap exists.

Kobe's scoring was another level and there's a huge gap.

Nice try tho.

[70sFan]

Can you name me one thing that Magic could do better as a back-court player apart from making assists and rebounding? Just one thing. Shoot? No. Score? No. Dribble? No. Post-up? No. Face-up? No. Handles? No. Drive to the hoop in half-court play? No. Finish at the rim in different ways? No. Use english? No.

Shooting at least is arguable, Magic was better FT shooter and peaked higher as a three point shooter. From what I've seen, Magic was also extremely efficient midrange shooter. 1985-91 Magic was elite shooter, he just had a different role than Kobe.

Scoring - yeah, there's no case for Magic.

Dribble - it's close, Magic seemed to have more control on high speed but Kobe could manipluate it better in iso.

Post up - Magic was definitely a better post player and it's not close. Much superior post passer and more dangerous scorer.

Face-up - I agree, Kobe is on another level.

Handles - don't see any difference between handles and dribbling.

Driving - Kobe is quicker and shifter, but Magic was bigger and better at drawing fouls. Again, it's close.

Finish at the rim - I don't have data to back it up, but I'd take a bet that Magic was a better inside finisher than Kobe. He was simply bigger and stronger than him. Besides, Magic's inside repertoire was also great - I've seen very few players having such a good touch on hooks, floaters, finger-rolls, push shots...

Use english - yeah, Kobe was better. I don't see this as significant though.

Of course you also focused heavily on scoring skills while rejecting whole another dimension and calling it "assists". Magic's playmaking was on absolutely another level and this is where the real gap exists.

Kobe's scoring was another level and there's a huge gap.

Nice try tho.

Yeah, but not bigger than playmaking gap. Magic is better overall offensive player.

[Dutchball97]

Can you name me one thing that Magic could do better as a back-court player apart from making assists and rebounding? Just one thing. Shoot? No. Score? No. Dribble? No. Post-up? No. Face-up? No. Handles? No. Drive to the hoop in half-court play? No. Finish at the rim in different ways? No. Use english? No.

Shooting at least is arguable, Magic was better FT shooter and peaked higher as a three point shooter. From what I've seen, Magic was also extremely efficient midrange shooter. 1985-91 Magic was elite shooter, he just had a different role than Kobe.

Scoring - yeah, there's no case for Magic.

Dribble - it's close, Magic seemed to have more control on high speed but Kobe could manipluate it better in iso.

Post up - Magic was definitely a better post player and it's not close. Much superior post passer and more dangerous scorer.

Face-up - I agree, Kobe is on another level.

Handles - don't see any difference between handles and dribbling.

Driving - Kobe is quicker and shifter, but Magic was bigger and better at drawing fouls. Again, it's close.

Finish at the rim - I don't have data to back it up, but I'd take a bet that Magic was a better inside finisher than Kobe. He was simply bigger and stronger than him. Besides, Magic's inside repertoire was also great - I've seen very few players having such a good touch on hooks, floaters, finger-rolls, push shots...

Use english - yeah, Kobe was better. I don't see this as significant though.

Of course you also focused heavily on scoring skills while rejecting whole another dimension and calling it "assists". Magic's playmaking was on absolutely another level and this is where the real gap exists.

Kobe's scoring was another level and there's a huge gap.

Nice try tho.

He literally said there is no case for Magic in terms of scoring. It is the first point of all the things listed. Can you even read?

[Strepbacter]

Nah. It's just as big as the playmaking gap. Throw in the defense and Bryant was at least as good.

[Strepbacter]

Shooting at least is arguable, Magic was better FT shooter and peaked higher as a three point shooter. From what I've seen, Magic was also extremely efficient midrange shooter. 1985-91 Magic was elite shooter, he just had a different role than Kobe.

Scoring - yeah, there's no case for Magic.

Dribble - it's close, Magic seemed to have more control on high speed but Kobe could manipluate it better in iso.

Post up - Magic was definitely a better post player and it's not close. Much superior post passer and more dangerous scorer.

Face-up - I agree, Kobe is on another level.

Handles - don't see any difference between handles and dribbling.

Driving - Kobe is quicker and shifter, but Magic was bigger and better at drawing fouls. Again, it's close.

Finish at the rim - I don't have data to back it up, but I'd take a bet that Magic was a better inside finisher than Kobe. He was simply bigger and stronger than him. Besides, Magic's inside repertoire was also great - I've seen very few players having such a good touch on hooks, floaters, finger-rolls, push shots...

Use english - yeah, Kobe was better. I don't see this as significant though.

Of course you also focused heavily on scoring skills while rejecting whole another dimension and calling it "assists". Magic's playmaking was on absolutely another level and this is where the real gap exists.

Kobe's scoring was another level and there's a huge gap.

Nice try tho.

He literally said there is no case for Magic in terms of scoring. It is the first point of all the things listed. Can you even read?

"...and this is where the real gap exists"

Get back to me after you've worked on your reading comprehension.

[Dutchball97]

Kobe's scoring was another level and there's a huge gap.

Nice try tho.

He literally said there is no case for Magic in terms of scoring. It is the first point of all the things listed. Can you even read?

"...and this is where the real gap exists"

Get back to me after you've worked on your reading comprehension.

Nice try at saving that one lol. You're still wrong though, the playmaking gap is much larger than the scoring gap.

[Strepbacter]

Nah. The scoring gap is at least as significant. Throw in the superior defense and off ball game and he was more than comparable. Nice try tho.

[70sFan]

I wonder how is that possible that Magic anchored better offenses in 1988-91 period than Kobe ever did after Shaq left, even though he didn't have more talented supporting casts.

[Dutchball97]

Nah. The scoring gap is at least as significant. Throw in the superior defense and off ball game and he was more than comparable. Nice try tho.

At this point there is no use in continuing. You're clearly salty and unwilling to have any kind of meaningful discussion. To be honest I'm kinda done with this as well. How about we just don't mention Kobe for the next month or so?

[Strepbacter]

I wonder how it's possible that peak Bryant anchored a team that was more than comparable to any Magic led team, even though he had didn't have a more talented supporting cast.

[Strepbacter]

Nah. The scoring gap is at least as significant. Throw in the superior defense and off ball game and he was more than comparable. Nice try tho.

At this point there is no use in continuing. You're clearly salty and unwilling to have any kind of meaningful discussion. To be honest I'm kinda done with this as well. How about we just don't mention Kobe for the next month or so?

Yeah, anybody who disagrees with you is obviously just "salty"

Take a break.

[Dutchball97]

Nah. The scoring gap is at least as significant. Throw in the superior defense and off ball game and he was more than comparable. Nice try tho.

At this point there is no use in continuing. You're clearly salty and unwilling to have any kind of meaningful discussion. To be honest I'm kinda done with this as well. How about we just don't mention Kobe for the next month or so?

Yeah, anybody who disagrees with you is obviously just "salty"

Take a break.

Lmao I just said let's leave this be since it won't get any of anywhere but you can't even do that. Go spend the rest of your day vehemently "defending" Kobe in every single thread, have fun.