Lowest arguable ranking for Kobe?

[Doranku]

One thing often not mentioned when speaking of Kobe, especially when comparing him to Jordan or Lebron is that Kobe won all his titles in the toughest conference in the NBA.

Kobe went through a crucible every single yr before even getting to the finals.

You could probably throw a * on almost every season they advanced. During the threepeat years there was always serious allegations of officiating corruption in favor of LA that was basically validated by David stern. Fast forward to 08/09 and LA hardly beat anyone in convincing fashion...Houston didn't have Yao and there were reports Chauncey Billups playing injured as was Melo.in 2010 they beat...who? Like Utah and Phoenix...wow big deal

And once again yes...Kobe played with 2 HOF bigs in their prime...possibly even 2 1/2 given how impactful Bynum was when healthy.

Given how much KoME cried for attention and held the league ransom with his "Mamba mentality" marketing nonsense his career is hardly remarkable outside of being more of an "icon" than a player.

More revisionist history, typical Kobe haters.

I'd love to hear all about the serious allegations when the Lakers went 15-1 in the playoffs en route to a title. One game against the Kings in 2002 doesn't invalidate the entire threepeat, especially when the officiating was just as bad in Sacramento's favor during game 5.

Kobe basically single handedly took out the reigning champion Spurs in '08. A 5 game beatdown where he averaged 29/6/4 on 53/33/91 splits. Gasol put up a meager 13/10/4 on 44% shooting.

Neither Billups nor Melo were injured. Kobe, however, was playing with multiple mangled fingers during the '08-10 years, and was playing on one knee during the 2010 playoffs. Had his knee drained of fluid multiple times in between series.

Bynum averaged 6/4 during the 2009 playoffs and 9/7 during 2010 playoffs. Definitely hall of fame production right there.

I don't even know how to address the "held the league ransom with his Mamba mentality" bit. Think you were just full on unhinged by that point remembering all the titles he won.

[Nazrmohamed]

One thing often not mentioned when speaking of Kobe, especially when comparing him to Jordan or Lebron is that Kobe won all his titles in the toughest conference in the NBA. The East was weak during Lebrons entire career out there and now the West is weaker. The East was weak in the 90s and I know people dispute that but the Bulls made up 90% of that reason anybody would feel that way. They won the title every yr, they were in the East so therefore the East is strong. But you take them away and he faced the Knicks and maybe the Pacers then a bunch of mediocre teams.

Kobe went through a crucible every single yr before even getting to the finals.

The argument against Kobe was that for his 1st 3 titles he wasn't even the beat player on his team.....and I'm not talking about the Pau argument. I mean the whole season, he was the beta player under Shaq.

The goal here is to create the LOWEST POSSIBLE ranking for kobe that you can defend! This isn't that. You have to try and move kobe down, that's the ENTIRE POINT of this thread! If you're trying to move him, up, you've missed the point.

I was just making a side point. I wasnt even trying to rank him.....or I got sidetracked and forgot. It happens sometimes.

But to answer the question for me it's like 12.

[BostonCouchGM]

One thing often not mentioned when speaking of Kobe, especially when comparing him to Jordan or Lebron is that Kobe won all his titles in the toughest conference in the NBA. The East was weak during Lebrons entire career out there and now the West is weaker. The East was weak in the 90s and I know people dispute that but the Bulls made up 90% of that reason anybody would feel that way. They won the title every yr, they were in the East so therefore the East is strong. But you take them away and he faced the Knicks and maybe the Pacers then a bunch of mediocre teams.

Kobe went through a crucible every single yr before even getting to the finals.

The argument against Kobe was that for his 1st 3 titles he wasn't even the beat player on his team.....and I'm not talking about the Pau argument. I mean the whole season, he was the beta player under Shaq.

For the first three-peat the East wasn't just the Knicks and Pacers. The Cavs, Heat and aging Celtics and Pistons were still somewhat of a threat and the East was very strong overall. For the 2nd three-peat it was absolutely weak af though

[hoosierdaddy34]

If giving an honest assessment and removing all personal bias and hatred of him? 9 or 10 is the lowest you could rank him.

[dhsilv2]

One thing often not mentioned when speaking of Kobe, especially when comparing him to Jordan or Lebron is that Kobe won all his titles in the toughest conference in the NBA. The East was weak during Lebrons entire career out there and now the West is weaker. The East was weak in the 90s and I know people dispute that but the Bulls made up 90% of that reason anybody would feel that way. They won the title every yr, they were in the East so therefore the East is strong. But you take them away and he faced the Knicks and maybe the Pacers then a bunch of mediocre teams.

Kobe went through a crucible every single yr before even getting to the finals.

The argument against Kobe was that for his 1st 3 titles he wasn't even the beat player on his team.....and I'm not talking about the Pau argument. I mean the whole season, he was the beta player under Shaq.

The goal here is to create the LOWEST POSSIBLE ranking for kobe that you can defend! This isn't that. You have to try and move kobe down, that's the ENTIRE POINT of this thread! If you're trying to move him, up, you've missed the point.

I was just making a side point. I wasnt even trying to rank him.....or I got sidetracked and forgot. It happens sometimes.

But to answer the question for me it's like 12.

You can't get a guy who's generally by most analysis at best 12th down even a spot? You can't for example decide that for your rankings you don't consider the playoffs or titles because of the team component? You can't see where someone values passing higher than you and sees volume shooting as less valuable? You can't take a stats approach? Dropping kobe when trying your best to low him beyond 12th is so simple.

[Asianiac_24]

LeBron
KAJ
Wilt
Jordan
Hakeem
Magic
Bird
Russell
Duncan
Shaq

Can easily be argued better.

Curry
Garnett
Giannis
Dirk
Durant
Oscar

Can be argued above Kobe if peak is big for you.

I might be missing a name here and there but I think that’s it.

Around 16-20

[naabzor]

I really don't understand how people can think that Garnett or Dirk are better then Kobe Bryant... I mean I understand that Kobe had more help and better teams, I know, but are you serious? Do you think that Dirk or Garnett would have won more then 5 rings? Nope. Garnett had a super team and won just one ring, and Dirk status is overrated because the one and only ring he won was incredible but guys, they are not better then Kobe Bryant.

[HeartBreakKid]

I really don't understand how people can think that Garnett or Dirk are better then Kobe Bryant... I mean I understand that Kobe had more help and better teams, I know, but are you serious? Do you think that Dirk or Garnett would have won more then 5 rings? Nope. Garnett had a super team and won just one ring, and Dirk status is overrated because the one and only ring he won was incredible but guys, they are not better then Kobe Bryant.

Garnett had a superteam for one year (and werent even favored to win the conference)....and won a championship. So 1/1 is pretty good. He had an season ending injury the next year and was never the same. You really think his career and Kobe Bryant's career had the same amount of opportunity? KG had won championship roster and won one title, and nearly another one - that seems like he is plenty good.

Dirk never had a super team, how on earth is he overrated?


The fact is your entire argument proves why Kobe Bryant does get overrated. Your entire post is about winning rings, and you didn't even bother to look at how good each of those 3 players are. You didn't even bother to see WHY or HOW Kobe, Garnett and Dirk won their rings.

If you're using the same line of thinking of rating players that you did in middleschool, then something is probably off. Garnett and Dirk among the best players of their time along with Bryant, why on earth would they be far worse than him?

Kobe Bryant and Dirk Nowitzki are very comparable to each other. Kobe just won more and was much easier to market. Bigs in general are underrated since the 90s.

[Nazrmohamed]

The goal here is to create the LOWEST POSSIBLE ranking for kobe that you can defend! This isn't that. You have to try and move kobe down, that's the ENTIRE POINT of this thread! If you're trying to move him, up, you've missed the point.

I was just making a side point. I wasnt even trying to rank him.....or I got sidetracked and forgot. It happens sometimes.

But to answer the question for me it's like 12.

You can't get a guy who's generally by most analysis at best 12th down even a spot? You can't for example decide that for your rankings you don't consider the playoffs or titles because of the team component? You can't see where someone values passing higher than you and sees volume shooting as less valuable? You can't take a stats approach? Dropping kobe when trying your best to low him beyond 12th is so simple.

I guess I missed the point of the thread then cuz I don't understand what's going on anymore. You just asked me like 5 questions in a row. Do you want me to answer each one, or is there a larger point?

Where do you stand?

[dhsilv2]

I was just making a side point. I wasnt even trying to rank him.....or I got sidetracked and forgot. It happens sometimes.

But to answer the question for me it's like 12.

You can't get a guy who's generally by most analysis at best 12th down even a spot? You can't for example decide that for your rankings you don't consider the playoffs or titles because of the team component? You can't see where someone values passing higher than you and sees volume shooting as less valuable? You can't take a stats approach? Dropping kobe when trying your best to low him beyond 12th is so simple.

I guess I missed the point of the thread then cuz I don't understand what's going on anymore. You just asked me like 5 questions in a row. Do you want me to answer each one, or is there a larger point?

Where do you stand?

I already put up and example where I could see moving Kobe into the late 20's all time. I generally see him 12-15 range, but if the objective is to come up with the lowest ranking that you're consistent with, moving him out of the top 20 is actually pretty easy.

The point of threads like this is to engage in though that we generally don't do. This forces us to for once open our minds to how broad this topic is and how often we get tunnel vision thinking our view is the only reasonable one. The idea of ranking these players is inherently broad and subjective. Some people looking at awards, some titles, some stats, most hybrids. Some people see someone like Miller who provided great value for an extremely long time but was never elite, either one of the top 40 all time or a guy who should be closer to the back half of the top 100. When I first approached these topics, I looked at MVP's, finals MVPs, and then looked at peak seasons stats. Now I think that approach is completely silly as these awards are too subjective and a player's career value is more than their peak. But when I focused so heavily on peak play, I was also much lower on a guy like Kobe.