Not true. He was an integral part but we all know who was the most dominant players in the league at that time by far. It wasn't Kobe. And if you think Kobe was the second best player in the league at the time then the Lakers team was unfair if they had the two best players in the league at the same time. The last statement is for those who hate on Lebron for joining other superstars (Wade). I don't even consider Bosh a superstar but that's another debate.
It's hard to compare players who were different positions but I value arguably the greatest pure PG of all time over Kobe. It's not that crazy. Kobe was a very good player, one of the top 20 or so players of all time so it's not like I'm "hating" on him.
I don't even know how to discuss this with you, because you don't seem to value what I think is the greatest stat of them all - championships. Now, I'm not saying that you ignore the individual contribution to winning and that we should anoint Robert Horry a top 10 player of all time, but Kobe was the #1 contributor on at least 3 of his championship teams (First Lakers championship Shaq was the clear #1, but I see them as 1A and 1B after that). That is huge. I wouldn't say those Lakers teams were incredibly stacked...they had a bunch of old guys playing key roles (Ron Harper, Horace Grant, Rick Fox, Brian Shaw, etc...). That team was Shaq and Kobe and a bunch of role players. You keep bringing up playing both ends of the floor, which I don't get. Kobe's defensive reputation is probably a little overhyped, but he was still an excellent defender for much of his career (last few years notwithstanding). Stockton was a good defender at the point guard spot, but I wouldn't think of him as a dominant defender. Certainly a tier below Kidd and Payton in that category. You're obviously entitled to your opinion, bold as it may be, but I just don't even see this argument at all.
Well that probably does make it impossible because you seem to think that "championships" are a stat when they aren't. It's a coincidence. If Kobe had spent his entire career on the Clippers, would he be a lesser player because his team wouldn't ever do anything? Also....remind me again who is the all time leader in steals? Probably some average defender right? I really don't like to be in a position to where i have to defend that guy, but for some reason people keep forcing me to. No matter whether you liked him or not, John Stockton's records for steals and assists are ridiculous. No one is ever going to touch them, they are pretty much Gretzky/Nolan Ryan type records.
That's why I'm saying you look at individual contribution to winning. If Kobe spent his entire career on the Clippers, they wouldn't have been the Clippers as we think of them. They would have won! There's obviously circumstantial considerations, but, for the most part, great players win. It's not like Kobe was on the 80's Lakers/Celtics where he was one of multiple hall of famers - he was either the most or second most impactful player for 5 championships. Also, it's not like Stockton was stuck in some no talent, barren wasteland - he had many talented teams over a ~20 year career, but he (and his teams) weren't good enough to get it done. Steals are a pretty crappy measure of a defender. They're a data point, but not a very good one. Certainly below blocks. The guy also played for like 20 years injury-free years, which is admirable, but that's a big reason why his career totals are as ridiculous as they are. If you don't assign credit for championships which are "coincidental," you certainly can't assign a ton of credit to being an ironman, which is just dumb luck.
Lebron and Jordan were the best players on 100% of their championship teams. Kobe wasn't even the best player on 50% of his lol this isn't even an argument you Kobe fans are delusional but please continue because it is HILARIOUS. :grin:
Dude. You are dripping with hatred of Kobe Bryant. How can a player with 5 rings be a cheap imitation of anybody? Just give Kobe a little credit. Every one of your post sounds like you have a grudge against the guy. Cheap imitation? You sound as ridiculous as bobbythegreat lol. If Lebron never won another ring, he wouldn't be in the conversation of MJ or Kobe. He has the accolades, but he still needs to prove he can win a ring being THE MAN. Until he wins a ring without Wade & Bosh, he's not even in the conversation. It's only fair
If you put Kobe on the Clippers then they still probably would have lost, because they had horrible management for most of his career. Kobe has never been out of round one without a stacked team, and do you trust Clippers management to put a title contender around Bryant? Please remember Elgin Baylor was the Clippers GM most of Kobe's career. From what we have seen actually happen, odds are Kobe would have gotten frustrated with the lack of help and left, like he tried to do after LA failed to put a quality team around him for only 3 seasons.
How is someone the #1 contributor in a 1A/1B situation when they are 1B? "The" is not plural. It is singular. The #1 contributor to those teams was Shaq.
If Kobe cared about stats as much as some others he should have played in the least instead of west. He could have been the no.1 scorer by now.
But they weren't interchangeable. Kobe says he was the 2nd banana. Shaq was the primary player on those teams. Kobe was not as important as him. Why is this even still debatable when Kobe acknowledges that he was not the primary guy?
I'm sorry you're confusing objectivity with hatred. I think Kobe is a great player and top 15 in the modern era. But you're comparing him to Jordan, and he falls significantly short. Sorry, but he is a cheap imitation. That's the reality. Look at it this way though....even though he's a cheap imitation, he's the only shooting guard good enough to be compared to Jordan. Here's another example. Kevin Garnett was a great player. He was an MVP, DPOY, a champion, and the cornerstone of the Timberwolves franchise. He's still a cheap imitation of Olajuwon. If Lebron and Kobe retired today, history would rank Lebron higher. His superior stats and accolades more than compensate for Kobe's 3 additional titles as the #2 option on his team. Lebron was undoubtedly the best player on both his championship teams. He's already proven he can win a ring being THE MAN.
Although I would agree with that bolded statement, it would still be very much debatable. But if Lebron played at this level for at least another 3-5 years and wins at least another ring or 2, then there would be no doubt. Reason I say this is for example, if Lebron for some reason just broke down tomorrow and is unable to play at this level again (know on wood) ppl can always just say, he didnt have longevity and only dominated the league for 4-6 years etc... But I do agree, the projection of Lebron's career is already way ahead of Kobe's at the same stage and all he has to do is maintain it for at least another 3-5 years. One thing i have to give to Kobe is his longevity in playing at a high level for many years.
But im not trying to take anything away from Kobe. It's just Lebron is arguably already the top 5 greatest players of all time if he plays at this level for another 3 years even without winning another ring, but if he does win several more, i would place him in the top 4.... 1) Jordan 2) Bird) 3) Magic 4) Kareem 5) Wilt/Lebron (can't decide who should be higher)
Lebron has 2nd highest PER only behind Jordan (I know this will go down eventually in his last years of his career) but it will remain top 3, i can guarantee that....4 MVP's, 2 MVP finals, his versatility and his size and still able to play from the perimeter is very special. It is hard to pick top 5 greatest players in history when there are so many to choose from. It's just my personal preference and I understand if you don't agree because i mean apart from Jordan, everyone else is debatable. Hakeem is close but lets just say his era was kind of dominated by Jordan. Russell has won 11 championships, but that era is so different to the NBA in winning rings that we know today and Wilt Chamberlain statistically is just so far dominant than Russell in that era, I had to go with Wilt. Duncan is also close, but you can't possibly say he was the best player for 5-7 years in the NBA.
in my eyes, lebron james doesnt deserve the ROY award. Carmelo Anthony shouldve won it. I have yet heard one good reason why lebron won ROY over Melo
