Kobe fans - why do you think he's one of the greatest?

[markinca]

Originally Posted by FT35

You’ve got pages of sports/hobby experts pointing this out to you

Oh, and I had to chuckle at this one. Experts, huh? Didn't realize this thread was full of such luminaries.

[Backtocollectin]

Originally Posted by markinca

I mean, I hate to generalize, but this is a prime example of what Kobe fanboys degenerate these threads into. No discussion, no point/counterpoints. Just crap like this. Laughable.

Is it a Kobe thread or lebron thread. Y’all lebron fans kids love bringing him up all the time lol.

[hermanotarjeta]

Originally Posted by Backtocollectin

Is it a Kobe thread or lebron thread. Y’all lebron fans kids love bringing him up all the time lol.

It's a Lebron thread disguised as a Kobe thread.

The only way Lebron nut huggerz can prop him up is by putting other greats down.

At least Lebron boyz have stopped trying to argue that he is better than MJ, thank goodness.

[pcptrade]

I am no expert, so I resorted to google search of "Top 10 basketball players of all time" and the following hits came up on the front page, all of these articles were from the past two years. Most of them have MJ at #1 and LBJ at #2 except the last three which have LBJ at #1 and MJ at #2. Kobe is not in the top #5 and I do not know why but he is in the top 15. If any of you are upset and disagree with the list and want to show you anger, please direct it towards the authors of these articles or google search engine


https://clutchpoints.com/updating-ra...t-players-nba/

https://www.foxsports.com/nba/galler...history-100716

https://www.thedelite.com/best-nba-b...f-all-time/48/

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...op-50-revealed

https://www.lineups.com/articles/top...yers-all-time/

https://howtheyplay.com/team-sports/...A-Players-Ever

https://www.britannica.com/list/the-...rs-of-all-time

Disclosure: I collect Jordan, Lebron, Kobe, Magic and Bird

[markinca]

Originally Posted by pcptrade

I am no expert, so I resorted to google search of "Top 10 basketball players of all time" and the following hits came up on the front page, all of these articles were from the past two years. All of them have MJ at #1 and LBJ#2 except the last three which have LBJ at #1. Kobe is not in the top #5 and I do not know why but he is in the top 15.


https://clutchpoints.com/updating-ra...t-players-nba/

https://www.foxsports.com/nba/galler...history-100716

https://www.thedelite.com/best-nba-b...f-all-time/48/

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...op-50-revealed

https://www.lineups.com/articles/top...yers-all-time/

https://howtheyplay.com/team-sports/...A-Players-Ever

https://www.britannica.com/list/the-...rs-of-all-time

Disclosure: I collect Jordan, Lebron, Kobe, Magic and Bird

Just to spoil it for you guys, here is where each of those sites ranked Kobe:

Clutchpoints: #10

FoxSports: #12

delite: #7

BleacherReport: #14

lineups: #9

howtheyplay: #10

brittanica: not ranked in the top 10

Wow... it's almost as if people who actually know the sport and write about it for a living think he's a top 10-15 player. Crazy!!

But what am I saying - I should defer to the 'experts' in this thread who say he's a top 5 and that I and all of these websites must not know what we're talking about.

[6celtics33]

Originally Posted by markinca

Just to spoil it for you guys, here is where each of those sites ranked Kobe:

Clutchpoints: #10

FoxSports: #12

delite: #7

BleacherReport: #14

lineups: #9

howtheyplay: #10

brittanica: not ranked in the top 10

Wow... it's almost as if people who actually know the sport and write about it for a living think he's a top 10-15 player. Crazy!!

But what am I saying - I should defer to the 'experts' in this thread who say he's a top 5 and that I and all of these websites must not know what we're talking about.

I'm trying to stay out of this and I agree with you on the low top 10 to 15 range for Kobe

But let's not dismiss the expertise of the basketball minds in this thread

Numbers do not tell the whole story and basketball is not baseball

Sarcastically downgrading people's intelligence here and calling people experts who on one of the lists I glanced at had Kareem at 10 (first time I've ever seen that) is not very supportive to your cause.

It's like pwcc saying hey this card has been reviewed by the experts at BGS twice so it's unaltered despite these "experts" on a forum showing otherwise with before and after pics.

Just because you write words down and get to publish them on a website does not make you an expert on the history of the NBA.

Just keep that in mind

[markinca]

Originally Posted by 6celtics33

Sarcastically downgrading people's intelligence here and calling people experts who on one of the lists I glanced at had Kareem at 10 (first time I've ever seen that) is not very supportive to your cause.

I'm not downgrading anyone's intelligence. I'm merely mocking FT35's assertion that I am somehow all alone with my claims and that he and the other 'experts' in this thread know better than I do.

Are those websites from above experts in this matter? Maybe, maybe not. Are the posters in this thread experts? I would be more than confident in saying 'no', and I'm definitely including myself when I say that.

And that's precisely why I leave the value metrics to the actual experts, and base my personal rankings off of what those metrics conclude. The guys behind basketball-reference I am going to defer to as genuine experts. They know what they're talking about. And if their calculations can't come up with a single time that Kobe was the value leader in _anything_, then I'm going to take that as a huge sign that Kobe was not nearly as valuable as, say, MJ or Lebron.

I sure as hell am not going to take some random yahoo on this thread's word for it.

[6celtics33]

The thing I've realized in these arguments I've took part in over the years is

If you have Lebron at 2 you're not wrong. If you have Lebron at 8 you're not wrong. If you have Lebron at 30 you're wrong.

The top is crowded and the differences in players is razor thin. Depending on what you value there is a range for your list.

Lebron and Kobe both have positives that lend some to believe they are very very high and others look more at their negatives and downgrade them.

Theres a case to be made for the top end and low end of the range.

The problem is that a lot of people are unable to accept that other players they didn't see were also great.

And if Rats has Wilt over Jordan that's not an insult to Jordan

If I have Bird over Kobe that's not an insult to Kobe

If I have Duncan over Kobe that's not an insult to Kobe

That's just how I value the game.

If you lump Jordan, Russell, Wilt, Kareem, Magic, Bird, Kobe Lebron, Duncan, Olajuwon, and Shaq in a top 11. And you have the goat as Jordan, Lebron, Kareem, Magic, Wilt, or Russell, with some order for the rest. It's hard to be wrong. I think those 6 can have a logical case built as the best ever. I don't see any case for the other 5 as the best ever. But they all belong near the top.

[Backtocollectin]

Originally Posted by hermanotarjeta

It's a Lebron thread disguised as a Kobe thread.

The only way Lebron nut huggerz can prop him up is by putting other greats down.

At least Lebron boyz have stopped trying to argue that he is better than MJ, thank goodness.

So true lol. Unfortunately most social media is ran by young kids who never saw anyone but lebron. I would take basketball players take on Kobe ( which more have him in the top 2/3) before I listen to a analytic “expert”

[markinca]

Originally Posted by 6celtics33

If you lump Jordan, Russell, Wilt, Kareem, Magic, Bird, Kobe Lebron, Duncan, Olajuwon, and Shaq in a top 11. And you have the goat as Jordan, Lebron, Kareem, Magic, Wilt, or Russell, with some order for the rest. It's hard to be wrong. I think those 6 can have a logical case built as the best ever. I don't see any case for the other 5 as the best ever. But they all belong near the top.

I'm pretty much with you on this. But there is a large contingent of people in this thread who DO think Kobe is easily a top 5, and if you disagree with that, will tell you that you're wrong and don't know basketball, and will not listen to anything that is counter to their opinions, even though there is absolutely 0 support for their claims.

Those are the people I have issues with.

And for the record, I do feel if you have Lebron anywhere outside top 3 all-time, that's wrong. I'm not saying he's #1, but to say he's not at least top 3 is absurd.

[6celtics33]

Originally Posted by markinca

I'm not downgrading anyone's intelligence. I'm merely mocking FT35's assertion that I am somehow all alone with my claims and that he and the other 'experts' in this thread know better than I do.

Are those websites from above experts in this matter? Maybe, maybe not. Are the posters in this thread experts? I would be more than confident in saying 'no', and I'm definitely including myself when I say that.

And that's precisely why I leave the value metrics to the actual experts, and base my personal rankings off of what those metrics conclude. The guys behind basketball-reference I am going to defer to as genuine experts. They know what they're talking about. And if they can't come up with a single time that Kobe was the value leader in _anything_, then I'm going to take that as a huge sign that Kobe was not nearly as valuable as, say, MJ or Lebron.

I sure as hell am not going to take some random yahoo on this thread's word for it.

I don't know the answer to this and I'm genuinely asking but do these metrics for example take into account in some way like how Jordan shot .497 from the field in a league where it was built for big men and hand-checking was allowed and it appears to me would be harder to be more efficient than say now where they can't touch you, freedom of movement to get wherever you want to go, etc. Like is it reasonable to assume Jordan's efficiency would be higher playing now or is that already factored into per across eras.

Because if not my problems with numbers is this

If you quote Wilt stats the first response immediately is well he played against small white guys and he'd never do that today

Ok but then the same people simultaneously applaud the league today as so skilled. The defenses are so complicated and the offensive players so skilled. Both can't be true. Trae Young and Beal are averaging 30. Luka 29. It's not that hard to score.

In the old days of small white guys Oscar averaged a triple double and nobody did it for 50 years again and now Westbrook does it every year and a few others flirt with it even though up near 25-30ppg.

So do we look at this era with that lense, that these numbers mean nothing or are at least inflated? Because they seem inflated to me.

Jordan scoring 45 against Utah in the finals when his team had 88 seems a lot more impressive than scoring 45 now when it's 128-122 in the playoffs.

There's more too it than pace as well. Lower scores mean less flow to an offensive player's game and much less margin for error. Every basket means more.

And I don't think there is a metric for that. If I'm wrong please tell me.

During our all time draft someone said their pick had a top 10 offensive rating.

I go look and I see their player in the top 10. Deandre Jordan is 3rd. Jordan, Durant, Bird, and Lebron are in the 20-65 range.

I give you basketball reference is a nice reference but it doesn't tell the whole tale. The eye test is important as well.

[pcptrade]

Originally Posted by Backtocollectin

So true lol. Unfortunately most social media is ran by young kids who never saw anyone but lebron. I would take basketball players take on Kobe ( which more have him in the top 2/3) before I listen to a analytic “expert”

Most of those lists have Jordan, Magic, Kareem, Wilt, Russell and Duncan in top 10

[markinca]

Originally Posted by 6celtics33

I don't know the answer to this and I'm genuinely asking but do these metrics for example take into account in some way like how Jordan shot .497 from the field in a league where it was built for big men and hand-checking was allowed and it appears to me would be harder to be more efficient than say now where they can't touch you, freedom of movement to get wherever you want to go, etc. Like is it reasonable to assume Jordan's efficiency would be higher playing now or is that already factored into per across eras.

Yes, it does. Offensive and Defensive win shares are normalized relative to that year's league numbers. That is precisely why you can use those numbers to compare across eras, because each player's win share total takes into account the overall offensive/defensive climate for that particular season that they played in.

What would Jordan have done in this 3-happy era we're currently in? Who knows. All we do know is how Jordan performed back in his own midrange-happy era, and he was a monster, compared to the league.

Is it perfect? No. But I would be far more confident looking at those than some random guy's opinion based on his own eye test.

[6celtics33]

Originally Posted by markinca

I'm pretty much with you on this. But there is a large contingent of people in this thread who DO think Kobe is easily a top 5, and if you disagree with that, will tell you that you're wrong and don't know basketball, and will not listen to anything that is counter to their opinions, even though there is absolutely 0 support for their claims.

Those are the people I have issues with.

And for the record, I do feel if you have Lebron anywhere outside top 3 all-time, that's wrong. I'm not saying he's #1, but to say he's not at least top 3 is absurd.

I agree Lebron is top 3 lock status if we look at careers as a whole like a resume. His game is built as an all around type game and he will end up at 30 or 40k points-10,000-10,000 which is the ultimate career triple double. We will not see that again in our life. The straight out of high school, ready to go, sustained excellence, never getting hurt, consistent production, is once in a lifetime.

But like I said, some lists arent' looking at it that way. If I go by a basketball reference page then he's 1-2-3 or 4. Jordan, Lebron, Russell, and Kareem have the best basketball resumes hands down. Order them how you want.

But if you watch the game with a player's eye and see lebron turning his back on his man and getting beat back door against good passing teams in the playoffs, see him arguing with refs after he dribbled 1 on 5 and jumped and threw it to no one and the other team went on a fast break while he lets his team play D 4 on 5, sees a tight game in the 3rd or 4th go from his team up 2 to down 8 while he plays without purpose and then ends up with 35-12-10 and it's like well it wasn't his fault then it's easy to not rank him that high.

Looking at it that way, he's not one of the best 5 players I've personally seen. That would be Jordan, Bird, Magic, Hakeem, Duncan.

Now I'm not saying either way is the right way to rank them. But I think that's why you have differing viewpoints.

Ultimately it should be a combo of the 2 and I think doing that puts Lebron in the top 3. Saying he has good longevity is looked at as an insult but I don't mean it that way. He's been great for a long time. That's worth something. That adds value to his narrative.

I just don't think all time ranking necessarily means best player like 2 is better than 3 and 3 is better than 4 and so on.

[pcptrade]

Originally Posted by 6celtics33

I agree Lebron is top 3 lock status if we look at careers as a whole like a resume. His game is built as an all around type game and he will end up at 30 or 40k points-10,000-10,000 which is the ultimate career triple double. We will not see that again in our life. The straight out of high school, ready to go, sustained excellence, never getting hurt, consistent production, is once in a lifetime.

I just don't think all time ranking necessarily means best player like 2 is better than 3 and 3 is better than 4 and so on.

Originally Posted by 6celtics33

If you lump Jordan, Russell, Wilt, Kareem, Magic, Bird, Kobe Lebron, Duncan, Olajuwon, and Shaq in a top 11. And you have the goat as Jordan, Lebron, Kareem, Magic, Wilt, or Russell, with some order for the rest. It's hard to be wrong. I think those 6 can have a logical case built as the best ever. I don't see any case for the other 5 as the best ever. But they all belong near the top.

Good points

[VIII]

Kobe is in the discussion for top 2-8 players of all-time. He earned it by overachieving throughout his career. I think it is still WAY too early to slot LBJ on #2 ahead of Kobe, Russell, Kareen at this moment. Maybe he could be there down the road but he is loser against Duncan (1-2), loser against Curry (1-2), and we don't even rank those players ahead of him. Not to mention that LBJ secured two bronze medals for the USA before Kobe joined the team in 08 to help US to bring back the gold. If you only count the positive and leave out the negative than Wilt should be way ahead of Russell if results don't count. As for all time pts and stats will eventually be held by newer players since league scoring average and personal stats have gone through the roof. Kobe's 81 pts game will be scattered again and again in upcoming seasons so are whatever pts LBJ finishes his career with. Numerous newer players will score more and have longer careers and that is just the nature of league rule changes and player's longevity if we just focus on the stats.

[whoaitsg33]

Originally Posted by markinca

Just to spoil it for you guys, here is where each of those sites ranked Kobe:

Clutchpoints: #10

FoxSports: #12

delite: #7

BleacherReport: #14

lineups: #9

howtheyplay: #10

brittanica: not ranked in the top 10

Wow... it's almost as if people who actually know the sport and write about it for a living think he's a top 10-15 player. Crazy!!

But what am I saying - I should defer to the 'experts' in this thread who say he's a top 5 and that I and all of these websites must not know what we're talking about.

i would take kobe’s peers and other legends over these blog boys ANY DAY. players who actually played, planned and competed at the highest level.


https://youtu.be/ind4Kd2GkhY


straight from the horses mouth
kawhi, larry bird, iguodala, scottie pippen, jordan, d wade, dirk nowtizki, james harden, iverson and Kevin durant All ON camera, said kobe is better.

including some second tier stars; gilbert arenas, chris bosh, kenyon martin, grant hill




but thats just me.



thanks

[pcptrade]

Regardless of what everyone at blowout thinks, one should acknowledge that LeBron and MJ are in the top 3. When it comes to GOAT debate, the discussion is on MJ vs LBJ. I collect both and can't wait to see which way the pendulum swings in the next few years and what the consensus will be when LBJ retires.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...outputType=amp

[shakobe]

As far as player collecting goes I think top three in the hobby are MJ, Kobe and Lebron and no other players come close (maybe Curry in a few years). As far as the GOAT discussion goes it is MJ on top and anyone else of Kareem, Bill Russell, Wilt, Magic, Bird, Lebron, Duncan and Kobe can have a compelling argument to be number two to nine and everyone will have a different opinion

Originally Posted by pcptrade

Regardless of what everyone at blowout thinks, one should acknowledge that LeBron and MJ are in the top 3. When it comes to GOAT debate, the discussion is on MJ vs LBJ. I collect both and can't wait to see which way the pendulum swings in the next few years and what the consensus will be when LBJ retires.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...outputType=amp

[isles4life]

I got Kobe in the top 8-12, and there is nothing wrong with that.

[6celtics33]

Originally Posted by pcptrade

Regardless of what everyone at blowout thinks, one should acknowledge that LeBron and MJ are in the top 3. When it comes to GOAT debate, the discussion is on MJ vs LBJ. I collect both and can't wait to see which way the pendulum swings in the next few years and what the consensus will be when LBJ retires.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...outputType=amp

I can see by your card posts and these opinion articles you post which way you lean and what you are hoping for.

It’s fine to think that if you want. I just don’t see how 7 assists to 5 mean you make everyone better compared to the other guy.

Then in the next paragraph they say how jordans guys were better.

Lebron makes everyone so much better yet their finals records are 24-11 for Jordan and 18-31 for Lebron.

Doesn’t seem like they are getting better. Sure they finished 2nd more. That’s good. But he didn’t make them better at winning no matter how many assists he ends up with.

Sometimes passing doesn’t make your team better. Sometimes saying get on my back and ride this horse to the title is better.

So if one makes everyone so much better than the other why is the narrative always that everyone around him is a bum?

How much better is he making them?

[pcptrade]

Originally Posted by 6celtics33

I can see by your card posts and these opinion articles you post which way you lean and what you are hoping for.

It’s fine to think that if you want. I just don’t see how 7 assists to 5 mean you make everyone better compared to the other guy.

Then in the next paragraph they say how jordans guys were better.

Lebron makes everyone so much better yet their finals records are 24-11 for Jordan and 18-31 for Lebron.

Doesn’t seem like they are getting better. Sure they finished 2nd more. That’s good. But he didn’t make them better at winning no matter how many assists he ends up with.

Sometimes passing doesn’t make your team better. Sometimes saying get on my back and ride this horse to the title is better.

So if one makes everyone so much better than the other why is the narrative always that everyone around him is a bum?

How much better is he making them?

Everyone here seems to have a collecting bias

Full Disclosure: I collect Jordan, Lebron, Bird, Magic and Kobe

[6celtics33]

Originally Posted by pcptrade

Everyone here seems to have a collection bias

Full Disclosure: I collect Jordan, Lebron, Bird, Magic and Kobe

I collect Jordan and Bird

That article was very biased

I can write a similar one the other way and post it here if you’d like

[pcptrade]

Originally Posted by 6celtics33

I collect Jordan and Bird

That article was very biased

I can write a similar one the other way and post it here if you’d like

That's the beauty of internet and social media. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and there is no right or wrong answer for the GOAT. It's likely arguing who is GOAT between Federer and Nadal in Tennis, Messi vs Pele in Soccer etc; Anyone can write their own article and come up with a conclusion of their own GOAT. I was just pointing out that a Google search shows list of articles on the front page which have either Jordan or LeBron in the top position. Are those articles biased? Maybe....

Edit: Forgot to mention that GOAT debate is subjective. It is not something that is quantifiable or measurable by some universal standardized measures. It is not the same as which is the tallest mountain or which is deepest ocean, the answer to which everyone agrees and not debatable.

[Archangel1775]

Funny, just had a conversation with another poker player at the table. I rally believe that LeBron had more championships than Kobe. That's not the case. Honestly, with the drama and attitude that doesn't represent who I am as a person, I can't say, in my own opinion, that LeBron is greater than Kobe.