Kobe Bryant the most overrated player in NBA History?

What're you talking about? Your original argument was that Duncan's competition at the front line was weak for most of his career. Obviously, you were wrong since he went through Shaq's Lakers twice.

And the 2003 Lakers were way past their prime? Seriously? They won the title in 2002 and went to the finals in 2004. Yet in 2003, they were way past their prime? Get real.

And now you're bringing up the Kings since they were the best overall team? Do you realize that you keep changing your argument? First, Duncan didn't face any front court competition. Then, Duncan didn't face any "prime" front court competition (which he did). Now, Duncan didn't face the best teams in the league.

Dirk-less Mavs? Dirk played 3 games against the Spurs in the 2003 playoffs and averaged 25 ppg.

 

Exactly it was a 7 game series. That Mavs team without Dirk is nothing special.

Duncan is an amazing player who has had a long successful career with alot of team and individual success along with durability.(very similar to Kobe) I'm simply suggesting to put him in the tier below Shaq, Hakeem, Bird, and Magic. I feel just like Kobe, Duncan is overrated through the media because of the era he played in. It's a similar argument, I don't know why you think I'm being so unreasonable. It's relative to this thread and this is a Rockets fan site, not a Spurs fan site. I'm asking you to prove the validity of why you feel so strongly about it.

Shaq in his biggest playoff moments beat and put up big numbers in

2000 Blazers (Pippen, R Wallace, J Oneil, Sabonis)
2000 Pacers (very physical team)
2001 Spurs (beat fairly easily)
2001 Sixers(Motombo)
2002 Spurs (Swept)
2006 Pistons (Finally beat them after losing 2 years in a row)
2006 Mavs (Not Shaq like numbers but still a big win similar to Duncan's win against the Pistons a year prior)

Hakeem in his biggest playoff moments

1986 Lakers (Enough Said)
1994 Suns (Barkley led with size in the front line)
1994 Jazz (Malone led fouling Jazz)
1994 Knicks (Possibly the best defensive front line in NBA history Ewing, Oakley, Mason in their Prime)
1995 Jazz (Essentially the same successful team from 1994-1998)
1995 Spurs (MVP David Robinson)
1995 Magic (Shaq)

 

One last note to sum up

Sorry to go on and on about this, but amongst my friends we have had these types of arguments many times. And I'm in the middle of finishing some grunt work so I needed to take a break anyway.

This is the easiest way to look at it. It is quite simple to validate Michael Jordan as the greatest player ever with the greatest career ever, because he has both the individual regular and playoff season stats, along with 6 team championships, and longevity to easily argue it. It's just too easy when you combine everything.

As far as Kobe goes. I would never argue that he has had a better career than Bird or Magic. He has the longevity factor of consistency, and being the better scorer. But I would argue when you look at Bird and Magic at their prime, they are better players for any basketball team in the department of winning playoff series, at the highest level of competition. At their prime, they are ultimately better players in the sport of team Basketball. In my opinion this is proven through their biggest moments in winning big games against legendary teams.

And I would say the same about Duncan. I'll agree he has had a more consistent, longer, and successful career than Shaq and Hakeem. But he has been with the same great organization, Pop his whole career, Robinson in the early part of his career, and Parker and Ginobli for the latter. But when you compare his greatest moments to Shaq and Hakeem in the playoffs then it's the same factor as the above.

I guess I put most of my weight in determining who's best by your individual stats during your prime years(4-7), combined with your domination in the playoffs against the best competition. That's my formula. You need to beat the best teams on several occasions, to be the best team, while always being the best player on the floor.

 

I just watched ESPN, in clinching games, Lebron's point average is top 3 which surprised me, but all I know is MJ is the leader with around 36 point. And Kobe was nowhere in the leaderboard.

 

don't be that guy...

 

My perspective with that is that heavily underrates longevity. I like to look at a player's career and see what they accomplished throughout their whole career, not just for 5-7 years. Yao Ming and Allen Iverson were monsters for about that timespan, and the latter had absolutely amazing playoff games against incredible competition, but Iverson is barely a top 50 player if that.

They're both great, but the tipping point for me is that Duncan has been a consummate and professional leader throughout his whole career while for better or worse, Hakeem really wasn't. Hakeem from 93-95 indeed had better years than anything Duncan did, but the fact that Duncan stayed consistent, really affected the Spurs's culture ( there was a recent article which observed that Poppovich can be a total hardass like Larry Brown, but the players put up with it because Duncan does and they follow his example), means that he is a greater player than Dream. I'll openly state that if the Spurs win the title and if Duncan gets the Finals MVP ( and I think it will happen) he becomes the fifth best player in my book.

 

Again your opinion doesn't weigh the competition aspect as heavy as mine. And that's fine I'm looking at the possibility of the players peaks at the highest level of competition, while you like the whole career aspect. It's all good.

If Duncan does lead the Spurs to the championship this year, I will feel a little more comfortable to put him in the same tier as Shaq and Hakeem. But there is no way I would put him above. The NBA would have to start producing some better teams(or the Heat play to their potential) in the final years of Duncan's and Kobe's career. And Duncan would have to defend their tittle at least once for me to buy into that.

 

no rings

 

your BB ignorance manifests itself

 

I find it rediculous to even think Kobe is overrated, let alone the most overrated player. At his prime his game was near flawless and the closest thing we will ever see to Jordan. Makes sense thought because he clearly modeled his game after MJ and is just as driven and focused and worked as hard as MJ did. He simply had it all. The ability to get by his defender and finish at the rim, a deadly post up game that features a MJ like fadaway, good mid range and 3 point shooter who became better in the 4th and a real good defender as well.

The great ones are defined as such by their ability to take over late and make the clutch plays to win the big games for their team. To me this describes Kobe.

 

wilt is a contemporary of Bill Russell, Willis Reed, Nate Thurmond, etc, a HoF Centers.

he played against these HoFers, including the playoff, ~10 games each / yr.


and that's not counting Kareem who played against Wilt for about 4-5 yrs

 

He and Shaq are the greatest big men in the last decade. I love Yao but no rings...

 

http://20secondtimeout.blogspot.com/2010/06/placing-kobe-bryants-career-in.html

 

Dan Marino didn't have any rings does that make him a lesser talent compared to every good QB who won a Super Bowl.

 

The NBA had smaller centers, but the people who keep saying Wilt most played against 5 foot players or 6,6 centers are dead wrong.

You mentioned Bill Russell, Willis Reed, and Nate Thurmond.

You also have throw in Walt Bellamy, Bob Lanier, Dave Cowens (briefly), Wes Unseld, Neil Johnson, Bob Pettit (PF/C), Clyde Lovellette, and along with Kareem Abdul Jabbar.

Everyone that you mentioned, along with my additions are all in the Hall of Fame. IF you take out Pettit, Chamberlain played against 9 Hall of Famers, and contrary to popular belief, most of them would still be playing center in the modern NBA.

You also had players like Bob Rule (career succumbed to injuries), Zelmo Beaty, Elmore Smith (briefly), Sam Lacey, and Johnny Kerr.

 

invalid comparison---different sports

 

more valid comparison would be Karl Malone vs. Tim Duncan.

it has been generally accepted that Duncan (4 rings) is the greatest PF of all time, followed by Malone (zero rings)

 

i think haters forget how clutch this man is, way ahead of the pack. He was doing this earlier in his career as well.

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

 

When Kobe plays well or wins award---(honored by NBA coaches as an elite defender, winning the MVP, clamping down on Carmelo in the last second of overtime to preserve a victory, etc.) not even a qualified faint praise is accorded. When someone makes a good play on him or when his team loses, it's proof Kobe is "awfully pathetic"

Quit trying to be reasonable and just join the party magnifying every flaw Kobe has while dismissing what he does well. It must be like smoking crack because some people here seem to enjoy it so much and can't stop themselves.

The tribal ritual of chopping on other teams' star players will never go away

 

Bump

Watching ESPN and they're talking about if Kobe is top 5 all time.

Kobe/Dwight/Gasol > 500

Would any of the other greats have ever let a team drop under 500 with two guys like that next to him? I could care less how awful the rest of the supporting cast is.