Is Kobe Bryant in the top 5 greatest players of all time?

[magicbalala245]

Simple question. I just got the idea from TNT where Kenny and Charles had a debate on this. Charles saying Kobe is already up there in the top 5 greatest players of all time and his argument was if Kobe is the closet thing to Michael Jordan then why aren't we in the sports public putting him in the Top 5 over players which Charles specifically mention Larry Bird and Magic Johnson that are widely in people's top 5 and that Kobe should be over both of those players. I can't remember his top 5 but he did put Jordan in there along with Wilt, Bill Russell, and Kobe at number 5. So make your vote and state wether why Kobe is top 5 or not of all time.

 

UPDATE: I see RD and Nitro still debating on this topic and I found a video on what Charles Barkley said. And here it is.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01GqEIL0Qhc&feature=related

Edited November 22, 2010 by magicbalala245

[Newman]

Kobe is a lock for my top 10, but I don't see him in my top 5...yet. If he wins this year he would be. My top 5 are MJ, Magic, Wilt, Bill Russell and Shaq.

 

EDIT: I am going to put Tim Duncan in front of Kobe as well because I am a big fan of the old school player. If Kobe wins this year, however, he is going to be in front of Duncan and Shaq.

Edited November 20, 2010 by Newman

[nepaliballer]

In my honest opinion he is, he already has 5 championships and has done so much in the game. He's made history with 81, 61 in 3 quarters.

And is the youngest to break so many scoring records.

And i'm biased towards this generation because i truely believe the game evolves over time

[Big Penny]

no, i don't think so. not yet.

[Real Deal]

Jordan, Kareem, Wilt, Oscar, Kobe.

 

Kobe is a better overall player than Magic and Bird, has as many (or more) rings than they do.

 

I almost want to say that Oscar didn't play against anyone, and Wilt was defended by power forwards for parts of his career...but I'm not going to bother with that unless I consider everything. I'm sure Kobe would've shredded a 10-team league, though.

[fish7718]

Wilt Kobe Jordan

 

So he top 2

[Oliver P]

Nope I do not believe that he is. For me the seven best players ever are Jordan, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Russell, Abdul-Jabbar and Shaq. Because no one dominated the league as much as they did.

 

Although I think that a case can be made for him as 8th best players of All Time. For the last three spots of the top ten, I'd say that it's arguable between Kobe, Hakeem, Duncan, Baylor, O, West and Dr J.

Edited November 19, 2010 by Oliver P

[Guru]

He is top 5. Wilt, MJ, Kareem, Kobe, Russell. No order.

[Dash]

Yes I think he's proven enough to us to sneak into the top 5.

[Real Deal]

I'm sure others can make an argument for Magic to this day (even though I don't think so), but how was Larry Bird more dominant than Bryant?

 

As far as Magic goes, he was not the defensive player Bryant was, not the dominant scorer. The fast break is where he excelled, and that was partially due to his all-star teammates.

[Makaveli]

Kobe has so many records and achievements it's almost silly. Not to mention the 5 rings, 2 finals mvp's, 81 and all the game winning shots. Definitely in the top 5.

[Lemon]

I have Kobe as #6

 

1. Jordan

2. Kareem

3. Wilt

4. Bill Russell

5. Magic

6. Kobe

7. Oscar

8. BIrd

[Nitro]

Nope I do not believe that he is. For me the seven best players ever are Jordan, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Russell, Abdul-Jabbar and Shaq. Because no one dominated the league as much as they did.

 

Although I think that a case can be made for him as 8th best players of All Time. For the last three spots of the top ten, I'd say that it's arguable between Kobe, Hakeem, Duncan, Baylor, O, West and Dr J.

 

I agree with this. IMO he's behind those first 7 players you mentioned, currently in the same realm as Hakeem/Duncan/Robertson, and clearly ahead of Baylor, West and Dr. J. By the end of his career, he'll without a doubt be top 8 all-time at the worst.

 

I'm sure others can make an argument for Magic to this day (even though I don't think so), but how was Larry Bird more dominant than Bryant?

 

-3 straight MVP's in the league's Golden Era (7 top 2 finishes in 8 years).

-2 championships and 2 Finals MVP's during his 3 straight MVP run

-24/10/7 career post-season average

-A 29/11/7 average on 52%FG/44%3PT/88%FT during his peak season

-If you're into WS, he led the league in DWS 4x, OWS 1x, and overall WS 2x

 

I can continue on, but there is no doubt Bird was absolutely dominant during his career, specifically in his prime.

[Real Deal]

I agree with this. IMO he's behind those first 7 players you mentioned, currently in the same realm as Hakeem/Duncan/Robertson, and clearly ahead of Baylor, West and Dr. J. By the end of his career, he'll without a doubt be top 8 all-time at the worst.

 

 

 

-3 straight MVP's in the league's Golden Era (7 top 2 finishes in 8 years).

-2 championships and 2 Finals MVP's during his 3 straight MVP run

-24/10/7 career post-season average

-A 29/11/7 average on 52%FG/44%3PT/88%FT during his peak season

-If you're into WS, he led the league in DWS 4x, OWS 1x, and overall WS 2x

 

I can continue on, but there is no doubt Bird was absolutely dominant during his career, specifically in his prime.

Dude, if you're going to give me all of his numbers, stick Oscar and Wilt on top of your list. We've been over this numerous times already. You can't sit there and seriously tell me you believe Larry Bird would dominate Pippen (just picking someone here) more than Kobe would in a one-on-one situation. I know you watched Bird. I know he's dominant (didn't say he wasn't), but come on.

 

Shaq is considered the most dominant player ever, but he never averaged 30 PPG, never led the league in blocks per game, never led the league in rebounds per game. He only has one season MVP. Almost looks like Magic and Bird were both more dominant, not even discussing guys like Wilt, Kareem, Oscar, and Jordan.

[Nitro]

Dude, if you're going to give me all of his numbers, stick Oscar and Wilt on top of your list.

 

Different era's...basketball was a LOT more different when it first started to evolve (in the '50's/'60's) to the golden era ('80's) than from the '80's to the '00's. And both Wilt and Big O are the least accomplished players, in terms of championships, in the entire top 10 list (and in O's case, MVP's as well). When numbers don't translate to dominance over the era (championships + MVP's), they don't have quite as much meaning.

 

We've been over this numerous times already. You can't sit there and seriously tell me you believe Larry Bird would dominate Pippen (just picking someone here) more than Kobe would in a one-on-one situation. I know you watched Bird. I know he's dominant (didn't say he wasn't), but come on.

 

Scoring in iso situations is only a small fraction of the game. Kobe is a more talented one-on-one scorer and one-on-one defender without a doubt. But Bird was better off-ball on both offense and defense, a better passer, a better rebounder, and was a lot more efficient (which is saying a lot from a guy who pretty much lived on the perimeter). In a way, it's like comparing Kobe to Durant (a SF trapped in a long PF's body with dead-aim shooting ability), only if you take away some of Durant's athleticism, but give him LeBron's passing ability, increased rebounding, greater help-defense, greater clutch ability, and overall much greater court awareness.

 

Also, if I remember correctly, during that famous moment when the Dream Team was playing pool where MJ declared that it was his league, Bird gloated about routinely abusing Pippen in head-to-head matchups. The quote was from a book, I'll try and find it.

 

Shaq is considered the most dominant player ever, but he never averaged 30 PPG, never led the league in blocks per game, never led the league in rebounds per game. He only has one season MVP. Almost looks like Magic and Bird were both more dominant, not even discussing guys like Wilt, Kareem, Oscar, and Jordan.

 

Listen, I don't really care about the subtle differences between most of the top 10 player's all-time. All I was trying to say is that to act like you can't fathom how someone would call Bird more dominant than Kobe is ridiculous, because he CLEARLY dominated arguably the most talented era in NBA history. He had the numbers, the MVP's, and the rings.

[Rog]

ehhhh I don't know. I'd def put Jordan, Magic, Wilt, Russell, Abdul-Jabbar and its really hard to argue any of those 5 out of the top 5, so I'd prolly put him at 6.

[Oliver P]

Well like Nitro said the main reason why I mentioned both Magic and Bird ahead of Kobe is because they both dominated what I consider to be the best decade of basketball ever, the 80's (90's are a close second though IMO).

 

Now about Bird I think that he's often underrated by many people. Of course I know that most everyone consider him as a top 10 player of All Time so it might seem weird that I say something like that but what I mean is that it seems pretty clear for everyone that Magic was better than him and that most people don't consider him as a top 5 player. Well I am not so sure personally that Magic was better than him... I think that both players were around the same level and it's almost impossible to say that one of them was the best for sure. In fact many people do not realize how huge Bird truly was at the beginning of his career. The Bird of the end of the 80's and early 90's was totally broken and had almost nothing to do with the one of the first part of the 80's.

 

Larry "Legend" was a fantastic player and leader and always had a huge impact on his team. The year before he joined the team the Celtics had one of their worst season ever with only 29 wins. With him they won 61 games during his rookie year. With Bird in the team the Celtics also made the playoffs every year. Bird is also one of the most versatile players ever (I would personally rank him as the third most versatile one, after Connie Hawkins and Magic Johnson). He was fantastic passer and rebounder as Nitro said, a triple double king, he ranks fifth of all time in triple doubles, behind O, Magic, Wilt and Kidd.

 

Now as Nitro said Kobe is a better scorer and defender, true, but not by far Larry was an excellent defender indeed. I'd give the edge to Kobe but honestly Larry was right behind. And if Kobe has a better offensive repertoire Bird was still one of the most efficient scorer in the NBA history and could score from everywhere on the court. His jump shot is for the best in the history of the game. He's the very first player to shoot 50% or better on field goals, 40% on 3 pointers, and 90% on free throws in a single NBA season. And he's even the only one who ever lead his team to a ring while shooting 50% or better on field goals, 40% on 3 pointers and 90% on free throws during the entire playoffs in 1986 !

 

Besides Bird could be a great scorer without shooting a lot, as a matter of fact he only shot more than 20 times per game 4 times in his career, Kobe did it every year since the 2000-01 season (except in 2004) for example. And Bird shot at almost 50% in career, 49.6% exactly while Kobe shot at 45.4%.

 

Finally as clutch as Kobe is (and I believe that he's among the three best clutch players ever with Bird and Jordan) I'd personally would give the edge to Bird. A case could even be made for him as the best ever, even if I personally would give the edge to Jordan though. I even know other people who think that Larry was even better than Jordan in the clutch...

 

What I like the most about Bird is his arrogance, his trash talking, how he told people what he was gonna do BEFORE actually doing it. He was unique...

 

One of my favorite plays ever was when Bird told the X Man, who was guarding him, exactly where he would hit the game winning shot. After a timeout, Bird made two baseline cuts, then posted in the exact spot he had indicated to McDaniel, paused, turned, and hit the shot in his face. Here's the video of it :

 

 

Another one that I loved, I couldn't find a video of that one sadly, but it was during a game against the Indiana Pacers, before the game Person stated that "The Rifleman is Coming, and He's Going Bird Hunting." Then Bird told Chuck that he had a Christmas present waiting for him. During the game, when Person was on the bench, Bird shot a three pointer on the baseline right in front of Person. Immediately after releasing the ball, Bird said to Person, "Merry [expletive]in' Christmas!", and then the shot went in...

 

I could mention many others like those one, this was what Larry Bird was all about.

Edited November 22, 2010 by Oliver P

[Real Deal]

Different era's

They all are. It all goes back to that point I made in another topic. In this Golden Era, with Jordan, 35+ guards shot 50% or better from the floor, minimum 15 PPG. Why? Out of almost all of them on that list...I doubt the casual NBA fans even know them if I had pictures, and some wouldn't even know them by name.

 

You can give me all the numbers you want, but there's nothing that will ever convince me that Bird can dominate a defender (or a double, or a zone) better than Kobe.

 

Listen, I don't really care about the subtle differences between most of the top 10 player's all-time.

The point was made. If you are going to start picking dominant players out of the bunch based on their numbers, accomplishments and individual awards, you might leave Shaq on the bench.

 

I'm selecting Jordan, Shaq and Kobe as the only three I'd never want to defend. Bird was a very good post player (most don't know that), but he had a lot of wide-open shots. A ton. He struggled with his three for years until Boston started throwing the ball into the post much more. McHale's assists probably went up, and so did his points, around the same time Bird was shooting his 40% threes (if I'm wrong, I'm only off by a season), and Bird was launching those open shots.

 

Kobe and Shaq didn't create shots for each other as much as people say. Shaq was creating for others. Kobe would only create for O'Neal when he drove the lane and dished through penetration. No need for it because both Bryant and O'Neal could break down a double better than anyone in the NBA.

 

Better passer? I can't say it's Bird. Bryant has thrown impressive passes throughout his career. Assist numbers don't tell who's the better passer, or else you'll have to explain why Iverson is a better passer than Bryant and McGrady, and why Rondo is currently on pace to becoming a top three greatest passer in league history.

 

Bird was better off the ball because he's played that way much, much more than Bryant ever has, which only helps my argument.

 

The only way to evaluate something like this, between two players of different eras, is to just watch them. You can convince me that Jordan was better than Bryant, even though I think it's close, but Bird is not more dominant than Kobe. Locked in, Kobe shuts down most anyone on defense, and if Phil Jackson asks Bryant to score 60, he would find a way to do it. That's dominance.

[Real Deal]

Throw the efficiency discussion out the window, because the Jordan era allowed 35+ guards to shoot 50% and average 15+ PPG while doing it. Not impressed, guys...sorry.

 

Besides Bird could be a great scorer without shooting a lot, as a matter of fact he only shot more than 20 times per game 4 times in his career

In a 12-season career, so 33% of his time in the league.

 

Jordan did it for 12 consecutive seasons (including one season in Washington), but nobody seems to care.

 

As far as the 50/40/90 goes, Nash has done that 4-5 consecutive times. Other players that have accomplished it? Steve Kerr, Dirk Nowitzki, Jose Calderon, Mark Price, Reggie Miller, and Shannon Brown is on pace this season.

 

Amazing three-point shooting by Bird for a few years. In four of his first five seasons, though, he shot under 29% from three.

 

Bryant is greater in the clutch. He may not shoot the better clutch percentage, but nobody has never defended Bird or Jordan (or Reggie, or anyone) the way they defend Bryant on last-second shots. He has hit them over two defenders multiple times. I've seen every game-winner that Jordan has ever put up, and those guys didn't defend Jordan the same way, not at all, for the fear of having to commit to the double and leaving a shooter open.

 

At the end of the day, Bird didn't even last but 11 1/2 seasons. He slipped back down to 33% from three in 1989-90, his 10th full season. Bryant averaged his 35.4 PPG in his 10th season 4-5 years ago.

[Nitro]

They all are. It all goes back to that point I made in another topic. In this Golden Era, with Jordan, 35+ guards shot 50% or better from the floor, minimum 15 PPG. Why? Out of almost all of them on that list...I doubt the casual NBA fans even know them if I had pictures, and some wouldn't even know them by name.

 

See, but here's the thing- It's HOW they shot over 50% from the field. With or without his peak athleticism, with or without Shaq, with or without Gasol, with or without the triangle, Kobe's style of play will always limit him to sub-50% shooting. More importantly he'll almost always shoot a worse FG% than a number of his closest peers who score in volume because of this (LBJ, Wade, Durant currently). Jordan ALWAYS scored more efficiently than Dominique, Drexler and similar players. Guys like Dantley and prime King scored with similar efficiency and volume, but nontheless Jordan was considered efficient for his time and style. Kobe is not. And since I know you won't take my word for it, but Phil Jackson himself said MJ's ability to shoot over 50% was a big difference between him and Kobe. Kobe is NOT an efficient scorer.

 

Bringing it back to the topic of Bird, I look at Durant. Similar type of frame and style of play in terms of scoring (with Durant being more athletic, but Bird having a post-game, better ballhandling and generally a much higher IQ). Durant is still able to score VERY efficiently, and I fully believe in today's NBA Bird would too. With offenses being more spread and guys like LBJ taking over 5 3's per game, Bird would fit in just fine.

 

You can give me all the numbers you want, but there's nothing that will ever convince me that Bird can dominate a defender (or a double, or a zone) better than Kobe.

 

I would think Bird would have a much easier time defeating a zone than Kobe would. Maybe not in a 1-on-5 situation, but he worked much better off-ball and was a much better catch-and-shoot player, which would wreak havoc on a zone. He would also be more patient than Kobe would, and his shot selection would be smarter, which would also help his efficiency. But yes, Kobe is amazing at all areas of scoring, and is a better iso scorer than Bird was.

 

The point was made. If you are going to start picking dominant players out of the bunch based on their numbers, accomplishments and individual awards, you might leave Shaq on the bench.

 

How so? Shaq led the league in scoring twice, FG% a whopping 10x, was top 3 in rebounding 5x, top 3 in blocks 3x, and besides Jordan he has been the only guy (so far) in the modern NBA to lead his team to a 3-peat as the undisputed #1 guy, winning all 3 Finals MVP's. His post-season runs during his prime were legendary. If he didn't miss so many games a number of those seasons, and if he wasn't completely robbed of his 2001 MVP, he'd have more MVP's at his disposal.

 

I'm selecting Jordan, Shaq and Kobe as the only three I'd never want to defend. Bird was a very good post player (most don't know that), but he had a lot of wide-open shots. A ton. He struggled with his three for years until Boston started throwing the ball into the post much more. McHale's assists probably went up, and so did his points, around the same time Bird was shooting his 40% threes (if I'm wrong, I'm only off by a season), and Bird was launching those open shots.

 

Bird shot over 40% his rookie season from 3. The seasons early in his career that he didn't shoot well from 3 were seasons that A) The 3pt line was still brand new and coaches were figuring out how to take advantage of it, and B) Where he was taking less than 1 3pt shot per game. Once he started taking 1-4 3pt shots per game, his 3pt% was over 40%. Bottom line is he was a dead-aim 3pt shooter, and in today's NBA where 3pt shooting is a premium and some coaches base their entire gameplan around the 3pt shot, I think Bird would be fine.

 

Better passer? I can't say it's Bird. Bryant has thrown impressive passes throughout his career. Assist numbers don't tell who's the better passer, or else you'll have to explain why Iverson is a better passer than Bryant and McGrady, and why Rondo is currently on pace to becoming a top three greatest passer in league history.

 

I'm using the eye-test for Bird being the better passer. He was a very willing, nifty passer who took care of the basketball. He understand offensive flow and how to get players the ball in their sweet spots...his IQ was insanely high. I generally include passing into the "playmaking" term, so even if a bunch of Kobe's TO's come off of careless ballhandling, that's still a big factor (Bird routinely had an A:TO ratio over 2:1, an area Kobe has never been strong at). I think Kobe is a great passer, but he makes a ton of mistakes when he is expected to consistently make plays for his teammates.

 

Bird was better off the ball because he's played that way much, much more than Bryant ever has, which only helps my argument.

 

How does it help your arguement? What's wrong or less dominant about scoring less in iso situations and more within the flow of the offense? Is Melo a better scorer than Durant on the basis that over 10% more of Durant's scoring was assisted

last season?

 

The only way to evaluate something like this, between two players of different eras, is to just watch them. You can convince me that Jordan was better than Bryant, even though I think it's close, but Bird is not more dominant than Kobe. Locked in, Kobe shuts down most anyone on defense, and if Phil Jackson asks Bryant to score 60, he would find a way to do it. That's dominance.

 

To measure dominance IMO is to see what a player did relative to his era. In a talent-heavy era Bird won 3 straight MVP's, multiple championships, multiple Finals MVP's, put up awesome numbers (relative to any era), won All-Defense awards a few times, and was the undisputed leader of arguably the best teams in NBA history. To me, that's dominant. Even if you don't consider him as dominant as Kobe, which is a shaky but reasonable arguement for sure, they are certainly in the same ballclub, which is what I was getting at you for in the first place.

[Real Deal]

I know exactly what Shaq did. The point was, he didn't average 30 a game (ever), didn't lead the league in board or blocks (ever). Has one MVP. Things like that...you go back and ask if he was even as dominant as everyone says. However, he is. Robbed of an MVP, whatever...if the MVP award was given out to the best players in the NBA, like it should be (instead of the best teams), Bryant has many more than just one. Either way, maybe Jordan was robbed of one when Bird got one of his, or maybe someone else...that's not what you were arguing.

 

I don't care how those guys got their 50% FG. That's 35+ guards that did it in that era. Some slashed, some shot the ball. They all did it differently. Conclusion? It must have been easier to shoot 50%, for guards, in the Jordan era, than it is in today's game or back in the late 90's and last decade of basketball. Can you prove to me that Bryant wouldn't have had 50% FG seasons back in the 80s and early 90s? If 35 others can, I don't know.

 

How does it help your arguement? What's wrong or less dominant about scoring less in iso situations and more within the flow of the offense? Is Melo a better scorer than Durant on the basis that over 10% more of Durant's scoring was assisted last season?

Because it's within the flow of the offense. Off-ball play means nothing if you don't get the pass. You just run around all game long. No screens? No pass? You don't look so dominant out there anymore. Richard Hamilton, Ray Allen...two of the top three greatest off-ball players in the history of the game (throw Reggie in there with them, even though he's retired)...you don't hear anything about their dominance. In fact, among all active players, you won't hear their names mentioned for a LONG time down the list.

 

By the way, the thing with McHale, when I stated his assists and scoring went up when the Celtics started playing through him and dishing it out to Bird on the perimeter...it was a fact. They did go up, coincidently, with Bird's shooting. Larry took more threes because McHale was getting him open.

 

Plus, we talk about Bird's shooting (and everyone else's, for that matter)...what about coaches running more three-point plays for Kobe than they did Bird? That also has a lot to do with field goal percentages. The overall FG% includes threes, as you know. Why are we even amazed at Bird's three-point percentage when he didn't even have one season where he took over three per game (give or take a few tenths of a percentage).

 

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/arenagi01.html

 

Gilbert Arenas has taken up to eight per game in a season.

 

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/allenra02.html

 

Ray Allen over eight.

 

Before you start talking about threes not being smart shots, they actually win games, and coaches are the ones calling for them, for the most part (as you noted).

 

More shots, lesser efficiency? You can relate them in a way. Jordan's first run (before his first retirement), he shot under 50% twice. Both of those were the only two times that he shot 25+ FGA per game. Before the first retirement, Jordan never exceeded 3.0 3PTA per game. Once he did (during the second), his overall FG% never reached 50% again, yet he was still playing at an MVP level.

 

Just more reason for me to believe that anyone's FG% from the 80s and early 90s should never be compared to those over the last decade or so, just like when you say Wilt's numbers shouldn't be compared to Jordan's, despite the fact that there were a few talented bigs that were defending him over the years (just not in his 100-point game).

 

You simply put their stats and accomplishments on the board, gave your opinion, and you were done with it.

 

All I'm saying is...it's the wrong way to go if you've watched both players. There are too many factors to consider.

[Real Deal]

...lol. I'd say something, but I better not.