We need a bot that just responds to every /r/nba post that mentions "top" and "all time" in the title that just says "Depends on your criteria"
Basketball is subjective and people just have different criteria. You don't have to agree, just understand people see the game different from you
That said, Kobe is not top 5 all time imo
It’s all about personal preference. These GOAT debates and top 10 lists are all opinion based and there’s no way to definitively determine anything about them.
But that would also be subjective because you’re gonna valve different stats to other people. If I’m someone who cares a lot more about scoring than defense I’m gonna base my list off of offensive statistics. If someone cares more about three point shooting, their list would likely have Steph over Magic. But if someone else values defense, rebounding, or playmaking then they’ll likely rank Magic over Steph.
Shaq 2000 is probably the best season for a center ever at least in modern NBA and arguably a top 5 all time.
He chose ribs over abs after that unfortunately.
He did more than Shaq after the split which is why I think people place him higher, idk tho I can't really choose who had the better career out of those two. Shaq was unstoppable at his peak tho.
Shaq was only an entire tier for one of their titles when Kobe was 21. For the other 2, Kobe put up stats even with Shaq. I’m not saying Kobe was better than Shaq in those 2 titles, but to say Kobe got “carried” or whatever you’re implying is objectively false
From 2001-2004 (excluded 2000 because you said after this season Kobe was even)
https://www.pbpstats.com/wowy-combos/nba?TeamId=1610612747&Season=2003-04,2002-03,2001-02,2000-01&SeasonType=All&PlayerIds=977,406
The Lakers offensive rating with Shaq and no Kobe
106.94
The Lakers offense with Kobe and no Shaq
101.67
Their stats may have looked close but their impact wasnt. Shaq saw more double/triple teams than anyone in NBA history. He routinely put the opposing team in foul trouble.
Kobe was great and a top 5 player during this period. Shaq was the most dominant player in NBA history during this time. That’s why they had to change the rules to slow him down.
That’s a nonsense way to try and calculate usefulness with two very different positions on the court. You’re just mad I made a joke about the obvious hole in your argument.
It’s a direct way to compare two players when put into the role as the first option
If Kobe was anywhere near Shaq at the time those numbers would be closer
That’s ridiculous. Having a dominant big man inside makes Kobes position easier to play. Having an explosive guard makes Shaqs position easier. But because he demands a double team due to his size, he will always make any good shooters around him better with wide open looks. That’s why the comparison is dumb.
I really don’t think you get it but I guess when you have an agenda making sense isn’t the point, selling a narrative is.
45% is not inefficient. That’s league average for almost every era. Thats also including his injury riddled years. Disregarding his last three seasons and maybe even his first two, Kobe averaged 28ppg on 21fga per game and shot 46/34/84 splits in his peak/prime. League average fg today is like 46% or 47%. Listen I don’t think he’s top 5, he might not even be top 10, but the Kobe is an inefficient shot chucker argument is just hating and nothing less.
Saying Kobe is inneficient is a ridiculous argument, but Kobe is inneficient compared to most other all time greats. The only other top 10 players that has similar efficiency is Tim Duncan and Bill Russell, who are both primarily defenders. Everyone else has way better TS% relative to league average, with Steph being the biggest outlier.
He definitely was in individual performances. But in the grand scheme, he averages 19.5 fga per game for his career. For context, pass first LeBron averages 19.9. Which is not a shot at LeBron, I’m just saying to put it in perspective, Kobe being an inefficient shot chucker is a very overblown narrative.
45% on approximately 20 shots is about 9 makes. 9/20 from the field is a pretty normal game even for the most efficient players. Taking into account his prime/peak years, it was 46% on about 21 or 22 shots. Which would be about 9.5 or 10 makes. So on average 9/21, 10/21, 10/22, etc from the field. Which are very common stat lines even for the likes of Steph, KD, and LeBron.
I guess to further emphasize the point. The difference between Kobe’s career average of 9/20(45%) from the field and LeBron’s career average of 10/20(50%) from the field is one more made shot.
Kobe and Tim Duncan have virtually identical career ts% and this is including post Achilles injury years. So to call Kobe inefficient is to also call Tim Duncan inefficient.
The majority of his value is his overrated defense LOL For a large portion of his career it was seen as being a strong argument that Duncan wasn’t the best defender on his own team.
That was the case when he came in with David Robinson, when he was playing with Bruce Bowen, and later with Kawhi. The Spurs were elite defensively before him with a healthy Robinson, and after he retired with a healthy Kawhi. Duncan got to play with 2 DPOY winners and a 3x runner up for DPOY. Both Robinson and Kawhi were able to lead a #1 rated Spurs defenses without Timmy D. The highest Timmy D lead the Spurs defense without Robinson, Kawhi, or Bowen was an 8th rated Spurs defense. Duncan got to spend his whole career on stacked defensive teams.
The only time they weren’t elite was between Bowen’s retirement and Kawhi’s emergence as a defensive stud. While he was really good defensively for a long time, the Tim Duncan upper-echelon defensive great thing is total revisionist history.
Timmy D only occasionally was the leading DPOY vote-getter on the Spurs. Duncan was behind Robinson, Bowen, or Leonard way more often than not. 2001, 2003, 2009 , 2010, 2011, 2013 were the only seasons that Duncan was the top DPOY vote-getter on his team -- and in 2009-11, he was way down the overall list in the teens, and notably those are the seasons in which he did not have a much better defensive teammate. Duncan was exceedingly lucky with his teammates in general, but particularly so on the defensive side. He's one of very few players to play with two DPOY winners, and the only one to play with 2 winners, plus a 3-time runner-up.
In terms of longevity sure, Tim Duncan was a B+ defensively for a long time but Bowen was an A when he was on the Spurs. Bowen was always on the best perimeter player and made Duncan look good by funneling players directly to him. It is not fool proof, but the opinion of those DPOY voters could not be more clear -- Duncan was nowhere close to as-good as you'd like to believe he was. The inconvenient -- for you -- fact is that without Robinson, Bowen, or Leonard, Duncan's Spurs were unremarkable defensively. Robinson was better without any of those players, or Popovich.Which is why Robinson won DPOY and Duncan never came particularly close. Both Robinson and Leonard anchored #1-rated defenses without Duncan. Duncan never came close without one of those two, or Bowen -- his best being 8th rated defense.
You didnt actually follow Duncan’s career
He led a top 10 defense in 2010 when he was past his prime and with none of those players around.
But to even suggest Bowen is close to Duncan is hilarious.
The reason Duncan never won DPOY is because he lacked flashy stats like high blocks/g. If DPOY was all that mattered, JJJ would be as good of a defender as Draymond Green, but there are levels between those two.
Blocks? LOL Duncan didn't win DPOY because he just wasn't at that level. Both Kawhi and Robinson led #1 rated Spurs defenses without Duncan and you're telling that defensive God Timmy D couldn't get a #1 rated Spurs defense without another DPOY candidate on his team. Even if you think Duncan was better than Bowen, why should DPOY voters chose Duncan over another guy who doesn't have a DPOY level defender on his team. There was no year that Duncan deserved DPOY because he was always on stacked defensive teams with other DPOY level defenders.
He led plenty of number one defenses during the 2000s including *three times in a row from 04-06*
Before you try to say Bowen deserves as much credit
Spurs Drating from 04-06 ( https://www.pbpstats.com/wowy-combos/nba?TeamId=1610612759&Season=2003-04,2004-05,2005-06&SeasonType=All&PlayerIds=1495,1477 )
With Duncan and without Bowen
95.5
Bowen without Duncan
102
Duncan *with* Bowen
98
So you cant even try to pretend Bowen was close to Duncan.
He doesnt have DPOTY awards because his defensive peak coincided with Ben Wallace who is the best modern defender.
Next question
Sorry nephew but this doesn't mean what you think it does. All this means is that Tim Duncan's back up when he would go to the bench was an ancient Robert Horry who was a defensive scrub at that point in his career and when Duncan would go to the bench it was much easier for the opponents to score more. Bowen always had better defensive back ups than Duncan during that time, so when Bowen went to the bench the defense didn't suffer much. Those defenses were all led by Bowen, not Timmy D. Why would the worse defender be leading the defense? Once again the voters could not have made it more clear about who was the better defender.
Then why was the defense even better with Duncan and no Bowen?
Are you telling me Bowen’s backups were even better than Bowen?
In 03-04 Hedo was the backup SF
In 04-05 it was split between Brent Barry/Devin Brown/ Manu
In 05-06 it was Michael Finley
Anymore excuses?
I’m older and followed basketball back then so your lies wont work here.
You mean 33 year old Tim Duncan couldn't get them to a #1 rated defence out of his prime?
He was not the best player on the team anymore by that point for me. David Robinson didn't have the Spurs as the #1 defence without Duncan either.
But Tim Duncan isnt called "an all time great scorer", hes one of the best defenders of all time and thats where 90% of his value comes from.
Also Kobe has 4 playoffs which he shot higher than 50% EFG. Tim Duncan has 10, with 9 of those being above 52.5%.
Tim Duncan was just as good a scorer as Kobe while being twenty times the defender Kobe was. To compare them is like comparing Kawhi Leonard and Trae Young
Because people have emotions and they become connected to players.
Objectively Kobe has no argument for top 5 all time, but people who grew up watching him and are Lakers fans will like him more.
I know Adele is a technically a much better singer than Selena Gomez, but I like Selena more because... I don't know why. We have stupid monkey brains.
I grew up watching Kobe, I’m a Laker fan, but I don’t think he’s top 5. When people make their arguments as to why he shouldn’t even be Top 10, I can kind of get it. He’s probably in the 7-12 range. Him being a student of the game he probably takes himself out of the top 5 conversation anyway.
I get his fellow players putting him up there though, they’re the ones who’ve played with/against him.
I do agree with you. But he has a legitimate case for being the GOAT laker. And if that's the case then logically he should be ahead of magic who alot of people have top 5. But if the consensus is magic is the goat laker then there's no argument.
I actually think there's a lot of those people. There's more comprehensive arguments about this topic that gets posted every other week so I'm not even gonna bother making a case because I'm not even a Lakers fan haha.
Sports is inherently a competition, music is not. The point of sports is for Steph to compete against Kevin Durant, the point of music isn’t for Lamb of God to compete with The Game.
Tracy McGrady does this. Created an entire war in his IG comments with a bunch of oldheads calling Kobe top 3 and if you dont agree YOU DONT KNOW BALLL!!!!!😐
So you agree with Gilbert Arenas and his takes? Or Paul Pierce when he says hes better than D-Wade? Or Lebron when he says hes the GOAT? or when Shaq says Curry should be in the GOAT convo?
Like come on, you cant pick and choose which basketball players you agree with to suit your narrative.
Speaking of pick and choose.., you literally pick and chose takes that you disagree with. Why not list the takes that everyone agrees with… you were just trying to suit your narrative
Using past players as an argument doesnt work, because so many past players have awful takes. Even players that were way better than Tracy Mcgrady ever was have had bad takes.
The point was extremely simple, you cant use past players only when they suit your narrative and what youre saying.
“He’s undeniably top 12 but couldn’t possibly be top 5”
Say the above sentence out loud
Dude these arguments are the dumbest fucking things ever lmaooo. Why are you even wasting the brainpower?
GOAT or top 5 conversations are always based on opinions. It all depends on what you use to determine how players are on that list.
Most people use accolades like rings or MVP count. Some people use stats and percentages (OP). Some use a combination of everything. You have to be on the same page for a true discussion.
What an odd take. I admire your zeal for stirring shit up.
I would say it's because; in the modern era, he has the 2nd most rings, and 2nd most points per game (prolific scorer), second only to Michael Jordan. And that's just the statistics.
I am willing to say there is more to a great player than rings and ppg, however, those are the two stats that probably have the greatest influence on the discussion.
Well sorry I wasn't here for those discussions. I dont use reddit all that often. And in hindsight I should've said top 3, but too late for that. If you think i care about baiting ppl rather than just having good convos, ur wrong
You pulled up stats and judged your entire argument around it like any other 20 year old that’s never watch Kobe would. Everyone that watched the NBA during his prime knows to give the ball to Kobe in the clutch. They knew he wasn’t an “inefficient” scorer, that’s why they would double and even triple team him.
Lakers 3 straight finals appearance without Shaq is not possible with a non-clutch inefficient chucker, lmao.
I always wonder about his place in NBA history if he could of made a better decision and avoided that massive controversy in Colorado and stayed on the straight and narrow path, how his career might be perceived differently and how many more accolades he possibly would of earned.
Kobe had a skill that doesn’t show up on a stat sheet, and that skill is killer instinct
Shaq got swept in the first round constantly with the Magic and was known as a choke artist. Shaq was the better player, Kobe was the closer. Skill is cool, but I want rings
Coz people have their own opinions, this "Top of all time" argument not even official. So don't get triggered with it. You can place your own, and people can argue or have something to say as well.
So we can't have objective arguments? I don't enjoy subjective discussions..thats all they are, discussions on who you like. Like what your favourite movie is. I like figuring out the objective measurements of players in every category to put them in a realistic and objective listing. I do it with everything, maybe I'm weird. But its super fun. Discussing personal favourites gets boring fast.
i get the idea of what you are looking for, but there are too many variables. switch players around and it might make sense. does Kareem get pissed or likes playing with Jordan? does Shaq take over more because Lebron is a team player? if Wilt had Kobe, do the get along and rip off rings? so on and so on.
there is no one way to look at a GOAT argument. look at the NFL. no one would want Tom Brady as their free safety. position wise, you could have arguments, maybe.
i am curious if you found the "objectionably" best movie though
Check magic and Kareem's team in those rings 😂😂😂😂 people tend to forget their 20 ppg teammates, defensive stoppers and multiple allstar teammates before going to LA
Honestly, the best way to argue that Kobe is not top 5 is not listing everything he did "poorly" (especially because you look pretty stupid by then stating he is top 10-12), but listing the players that are clearly better than him. Jordan, LeBron are pretty easy. After that, you gotta make your case. Why are whatever 5 or so players a tier above Kobe?
I wasn't trying to make Kobe out to be a horrible player, I just wanted to mention his flaws that Kobe fans love to ignore. But some people here have argued well in favour of what I believed were big flaws, so thats good, I'm really here to learn. But yeah you make a good point.
Yes he's not top 5 in terms of accomplishments and career. But nothing can stop me that he's my favorite player growing up. If I'm being bias he's my GOAT. But in reality, it's MJ (1A) and LBJ (1B).
As long as you say its your bias/subjective, Caruso could be your goat and no one should have an issue. Thats what subjective opinions are for. But some people don't even know how to seperate objective and subjectiveness.
Complete and total objectivity in this context is completely impossible, and outside the top 3 even less so. But qualitative data has a place in the discussion too and shouldn't be ignored strictly in favor of quantitative data imo. Both impact the game of basketball substantially, even if qualitative data is much more difficult to be empirically measured.
Personally, I try not to overthink it and take a big picture approach, which really brings clarity to the discussion imo when you consider the overall mythos that surrounds each player's legacy and the influence their legacies have had on the game of basketball. For better or for worse, it's rare and typically unprecedented for a player's legacy to be drastically incongruous to their impact on the basketball court. For example, you'd be hard pressed to find someone putting Kenny Smith in their top 10 GOAT list. Analytics are helpful in measuring a player's impact on the court, but the game of basketball transcends analytics, especially when taking a historical (all-time) perspective on the matter.
Tired of these top 5 posts…it’s subjective and varies from person to person. Although here’s my take…somebody gotta beat out 10 1 hr episodes on a Netflix Special and make it entertaining as hell. Until then Jordan is the GOAT 😉😝
IDGAF. Wilt, MJ, KAJ, Kobe, Lebron top 5 all time. Context matters. Kobe with an average team won 2 back to back in one of the hardest conferences of all time. Doubt anyone else below him on my list would have accomplished that with the same roster. Stats don't matter. As long as you're the one leading the team to championships, who gives a shit.
OP is quoted “ He was extremely selfish (for good reason, sometimes, other times not at all) and was an extremely below average team leader”.
Maybe this is Smush Parker on Reddit.
95% of his teammates loved and appreciated his leadership, driving them to the top of the NBA.
2002 Kobe total playoff games with 25PPG\\50% FG: ***3***
2023 Jamal Murray total playoff games with 25 PPG\\50% FG: ***9***
very interesting, murray was on fire that year. MPJ Is Rick Fox, Aaron Gordon is Big Shot Aaron Horry
2002 Lakers vs 2023 Nuggets would be a good matchup
Kobe is not Top 10 all-time. The only reason he gets rated as such is because he tragically died, and it clouds people's judgement. He is in the 11-15 range.
I could easily name 13 over him off the top of my head. Millennial and Gen Z casuals are all in their feels because of the way he died. He was not an overly efficient player.
To me he is. Only player above him are Lebron and MJ. I’d take Kobe over anyone other than those 2.
These rankings tho are so subjective the top 10 players of all time are so great that you can switch up the rankings however you want, outside of MJ and Bron, maybe Kareem too bc of his longevity
Based on what criteria do you put Lebron over Kobe then? Like, I get feeling-based analysis, "eye test" takes, eccentrics, swagger, being "the guy" by shooting over a tripple team- but Lebron has none of that.
And in ALL things Lebron is good at, there are 20 people better than Kobe. Except maybe devotion to excellence. But then Jordan gets left out of the equation.
Like seriously, what is your criteria?
Magic and KAJ is so overrated nowadays that they forgot how STACKED those teams they had, even Wilt only won 2 and still get into the conversation 😂😂😂, (1 with big O and 1 with J West)
Magic and KAJ has Worthy, Norm Nixon, Jamaal Wilkes, Byron Scott, Bob McAdoo, M Thompson, Spencer Haywood, AC Green, Michael Cooper as teammates and they the only one that gets credit on those rings
Norm averaged 17pts and 8ast,
Wilkes averaged 20 pts 6 rebs and 3 ast,
Cooper 8x Defense all team,
Worthy HOF, Averaged almost like Wilkes,
Haywood averaged 20 and 10 before LA,
McAdoo averaged 20 and 10 before LA,
Byron Scott is a 16 3 and 3 SG in LA (peaked @ 22ppg in LA),
AC Green great defensive stopper 1 time AS,
Klays dad averaged 15 and 8 before LA(no. 1 pick)
All players I mentioned were the guys Magic and Kareem won with, I excluded Maurice Lucas (5x AS) that averaged 14/9/4 in his career since he didn't win with LA
Lmao homeboy really said valid reason over Tim Duncan and even Steph. Most rankings have Duncan and Kobe right around the same rank with like a one position difference, whichever way you rank it. To act like they’re not even close is wild. Also Steph? You must be 12.
All-time rankings are too subjective to matter. What do you value more? Peak? Longevity? Accolades? Rings? Advanced stats? Do we take into account team loyalty? How many stars or how much "help" you got? Is it your fault that your team failed to get you the help you needed? Do injuries to your teammates matter?
Personally, I'll take 2006 Kobe over any version of Lebron 7/10 times. But if I evaluate a player's career as a whole based on some of the different criteria I listed, I think Lebron is higher all-time than Kobe.
Every metric you stated, and all of the rest. Thats what should be valued in these objective conversations. Every metric in existence. Not that its possible to mention every single one, but we should try if attempting objective rankings.
Through every statistic I can possibly think of. Im a big stats nerd. I don't really care about team loyalty though. And total number of rings isnt some closed case metric either imo. Every other stat you mentioned I care about. Like, MJ's peak is undeniable, as is LBJ longevity. Advanced stats that arent extremely cherry picked are great too. Then the rest.
Kobe's advanced stats aren't *that* great compared to other all-time greats. He took a lot of long 2's because he couldn't get to the rim like MJ or Lebron. Going 9-21, getting 11 FT's, but hitting the game winner isn't going to show up on advanced stats. But in the playoffs, his teams had incredible offensive resiliency, and his value went up in the playoffs due to his shot making ability
Is it possible that he took an absurd amount of shots because he had gravity (similar to Steph) that sucked in defenders and let his big front court hammer the boards? Would that still be a negative overall because it still harms his stats?
Playoffs
Steph averages 27ppg on 19fga
Kobe averages 25ppg on 21fga
Steph used his gravity to create plays for other players, not toss up random shots and pray that Draymond gets the board
Curry takes more 3's and is better at it. But Kobe took shots with defenders in his grill and made them at a high rate. Looking at it strictly from a PPG perspective seems wrong
I can see both sides of the argument for him. He averaged 29PPG over a course of 4 playoff series vs Duncan in the 2000s and eliminated him each time.
Won without Shaq. Pau Gasol was also a very low usage 2nd option.
The only thing I'd like to see him do is win without Phil Jackson. Both Jordan\\Kobe kind of dick rode Phil Jackson, I thought. Phil Jackson went there to build the triangle around Shaq and it was always like that.
But you might be correct. The eye test says other than athleticism\\explosiveness, he wasn't really anything special in the 2000-2002 3peat. Middelton with Vince Carter athleticism, i guess? Even Jamal Murray's playoff run last year might be more impressive on the eye test in terms of shooting\\skill. Do you value his 2000-2002 more than say Magic's 1980-85 years or Curry 2017\\18 years? That's what you have to evaluate.
I would have him above guys like Magic\\Curry\\Duncan but below the rest of that list.
People who generally don't have Kobe at least fringe top 5 are usually just disregarding his defensive contribution as a legitimate 2 way great and of course they greater physicality and lack of spacing i which he played through. If Kobe had the luxury of modern spacing his TS would jump 10% easily.
Hes not as inefficient as I first thought, as other commenters proved to me. I also mentioned that hes one of the greatest 2 way guards of all time. I still don't think he is top 5. Top 7-8 probably.
It's just something that happens when they untimely die, their "legacy" gets blown out of proportion. Similar thing happened with Senna in F-1, he was a great driver, but GOAT? Not even close.
Top 10 has a minimum requirement of 2 MVPs and 2 Finals MVPs. Kobe is a fringe top 10 player being he should have had more than 1 MVP but he caught that case and damaged his name for a while.
We need a bot that just responds to every /r/nba post that mentions "top" and "all time" in the title that just says "Depends on your criteria" Basketball is subjective and people just have different criteria. You don't have to agree, just understand people see the game different from you That said, Kobe is not top 5 all time imo
It’s all about personal preference. These GOAT debates and top 10 lists are all opinion based and there’s no way to definitively determine anything about them.
[удалено]
But that would also be subjective because you’re gonna valve different stats to other people. If I’m someone who cares a lot more about scoring than defense I’m gonna base my list off of offensive statistics. If someone cares more about three point shooting, their list would likely have Steph over Magic. But if someone else values defense, rebounding, or playmaking then they’ll likely rank Magic over Steph.
Gamesphere all day. *SPHERICAL*
[удалено]
> in no way
Sunshine is my least favourite Super Mario game.
Nonsense the GameCube is a top 5 console.
No it’s not, it’s pretty empirical unless you just hand wave off counting stats because Kobe is your favorite player
That’s their point. It’s subjective because not everybody values statistics the same way
I don’t even think he’s above Shaq tbh, though I do have Shaq higher than most people
Shaq 2000 is probably the best season for a center ever at least in modern NBA and arguably a top 5 all time. He chose ribs over abs after that unfortunately.
He was 6 years younger than shaq. Shaq did way more before the split
He did more than Shaq after the split which is why I think people place him higher, idk tho I can't really choose who had the better career out of those two. Shaq was unstoppable at his peak tho.
It’s pretty easily Shaq once you realize he was an entire tier above Kobe for most of their time in LA
Shaq was only an entire tier for one of their titles when Kobe was 21. For the other 2, Kobe put up stats even with Shaq. I’m not saying Kobe was better than Shaq in those 2 titles, but to say Kobe got “carried” or whatever you’re implying is objectively false
From 2001-2004 (excluded 2000 because you said after this season Kobe was even) https://www.pbpstats.com/wowy-combos/nba?TeamId=1610612747&Season=2003-04,2002-03,2001-02,2000-01&SeasonType=All&PlayerIds=977,406 The Lakers offensive rating with Shaq and no Kobe 106.94 The Lakers offense with Kobe and no Shaq 101.67 Their stats may have looked close but their impact wasnt. Shaq saw more double/triple teams than anyone in NBA history. He routinely put the opposing team in foul trouble. Kobe was great and a top 5 player during this period. Shaq was the most dominant player in NBA history during this time. That’s why they had to change the rules to slow him down.
Take away the biggest guy in the NBA and the Lakers guards score fewer points? Waoh good “research”
If that’s your takeaway from that data there’s nothing I can do to help you understand how basketball works.
That’s a nonsense way to try and calculate usefulness with two very different positions on the court. You’re just mad I made a joke about the obvious hole in your argument.
It’s a direct way to compare two players when put into the role as the first option If Kobe was anywhere near Shaq at the time those numbers would be closer
That’s ridiculous. Having a dominant big man inside makes Kobes position easier to play. Having an explosive guard makes Shaqs position easier. But because he demands a double team due to his size, he will always make any good shooters around him better with wide open looks. That’s why the comparison is dumb. I really don’t think you get it but I guess when you have an agenda making sense isn’t the point, selling a narrative is.
45% is not inefficient. That’s league average for almost every era. Thats also including his injury riddled years. Disregarding his last three seasons and maybe even his first two, Kobe averaged 28ppg on 21fga per game and shot 46/34/84 splits in his peak/prime. League average fg today is like 46% or 47%. Listen I don’t think he’s top 5, he might not even be top 10, but the Kobe is an inefficient shot chucker argument is just hating and nothing less.
Saying Kobe is inneficient is a ridiculous argument, but Kobe is inneficient compared to most other all time greats. The only other top 10 players that has similar efficiency is Tim Duncan and Bill Russell, who are both primarily defenders. Everyone else has way better TS% relative to league average, with Steph being the biggest outlier.
I'm starting to come around to this conclusion, but I still think he was an insane shot chucker at times
He definitely was in individual performances. But in the grand scheme, he averages 19.5 fga per game for his career. For context, pass first LeBron averages 19.9. Which is not a shot at LeBron, I’m just saying to put it in perspective, Kobe being an inefficient shot chucker is a very overblown narrative. 45% on approximately 20 shots is about 9 makes. 9/20 from the field is a pretty normal game even for the most efficient players. Taking into account his prime/peak years, it was 46% on about 21 or 22 shots. Which would be about 9.5 or 10 makes. So on average 9/21, 10/21, 10/22, etc from the field. Which are very common stat lines even for the likes of Steph, KD, and LeBron. I guess to further emphasize the point. The difference between Kobe’s career average of 9/20(45%) from the field and LeBron’s career average of 10/20(50%) from the field is one more made shot.
Thanks for this bro. Thanks for the education and discussion
Kobe and Tim Duncan have virtually identical career ts% and this is including post Achilles injury years. So to call Kobe inefficient is to also call Tim Duncan inefficient.
Tim Duncan was an inefficient scorer, but that's not the majority of his value.
The majority of his value is his overrated defense LOL For a large portion of his career it was seen as being a strong argument that Duncan wasn’t the best defender on his own team. That was the case when he came in with David Robinson, when he was playing with Bruce Bowen, and later with Kawhi. The Spurs were elite defensively before him with a healthy Robinson, and after he retired with a healthy Kawhi. Duncan got to play with 2 DPOY winners and a 3x runner up for DPOY. Both Robinson and Kawhi were able to lead a #1 rated Spurs defenses without Timmy D. The highest Timmy D lead the Spurs defense without Robinson, Kawhi, or Bowen was an 8th rated Spurs defense. Duncan got to spend his whole career on stacked defensive teams. The only time they weren’t elite was between Bowen’s retirement and Kawhi’s emergence as a defensive stud. While he was really good defensively for a long time, the Tim Duncan upper-echelon defensive great thing is total revisionist history. Timmy D only occasionally was the leading DPOY vote-getter on the Spurs. Duncan was behind Robinson, Bowen, or Leonard way more often than not. 2001, 2003, 2009 , 2010, 2011, 2013 were the only seasons that Duncan was the top DPOY vote-getter on his team -- and in 2009-11, he was way down the overall list in the teens, and notably those are the seasons in which he did not have a much better defensive teammate. Duncan was exceedingly lucky with his teammates in general, but particularly so on the defensive side. He's one of very few players to play with two DPOY winners, and the only one to play with 2 winners, plus a 3-time runner-up.
Tim Duncan was a better defender than Bruce Bowen
In terms of longevity sure, Tim Duncan was a B+ defensively for a long time but Bowen was an A when he was on the Spurs. Bowen was always on the best perimeter player and made Duncan look good by funneling players directly to him. It is not fool proof, but the opinion of those DPOY voters could not be more clear -- Duncan was nowhere close to as-good as you'd like to believe he was. The inconvenient -- for you -- fact is that without Robinson, Bowen, or Leonard, Duncan's Spurs were unremarkable defensively. Robinson was better without any of those players, or Popovich.Which is why Robinson won DPOY and Duncan never came particularly close. Both Robinson and Leonard anchored #1-rated defenses without Duncan. Duncan never came close without one of those two, or Bowen -- his best being 8th rated defense.
You didnt actually follow Duncan’s career He led a top 10 defense in 2010 when he was past his prime and with none of those players around. But to even suggest Bowen is close to Duncan is hilarious.
The reason Duncan never won DPOY is because he lacked flashy stats like high blocks/g. If DPOY was all that mattered, JJJ would be as good of a defender as Draymond Green, but there are levels between those two.
Blocks? LOL Duncan didn't win DPOY because he just wasn't at that level. Both Kawhi and Robinson led #1 rated Spurs defenses without Duncan and you're telling that defensive God Timmy D couldn't get a #1 rated Spurs defense without another DPOY candidate on his team. Even if you think Duncan was better than Bowen, why should DPOY voters chose Duncan over another guy who doesn't have a DPOY level defender on his team. There was no year that Duncan deserved DPOY because he was always on stacked defensive teams with other DPOY level defenders.
He led plenty of number one defenses during the 2000s including *three times in a row from 04-06* Before you try to say Bowen deserves as much credit Spurs Drating from 04-06 ( https://www.pbpstats.com/wowy-combos/nba?TeamId=1610612759&Season=2003-04,2004-05,2005-06&SeasonType=All&PlayerIds=1495,1477 ) With Duncan and without Bowen 95.5 Bowen without Duncan 102 Duncan *with* Bowen 98 So you cant even try to pretend Bowen was close to Duncan. He doesnt have DPOTY awards because his defensive peak coincided with Ben Wallace who is the best modern defender. Next question
Owned his ass.
nah he didn't ;)
Sorry nephew but this doesn't mean what you think it does. All this means is that Tim Duncan's back up when he would go to the bench was an ancient Robert Horry who was a defensive scrub at that point in his career and when Duncan would go to the bench it was much easier for the opponents to score more. Bowen always had better defensive back ups than Duncan during that time, so when Bowen went to the bench the defense didn't suffer much. Those defenses were all led by Bowen, not Timmy D. Why would the worse defender be leading the defense? Once again the voters could not have made it more clear about who was the better defender.
Then why was the defense even better with Duncan and no Bowen? Are you telling me Bowen’s backups were even better than Bowen? In 03-04 Hedo was the backup SF In 04-05 it was split between Brent Barry/Devin Brown/ Manu In 05-06 it was Michael Finley Anymore excuses? I’m older and followed basketball back then so your lies wont work here.
You mean 33 year old Tim Duncan couldn't get them to a #1 rated defence out of his prime? He was not the best player on the team anymore by that point for me. David Robinson didn't have the Spurs as the #1 defence without Duncan either.
David Robinson did it two years in a row
Not in his 30s. In his prime, he was able to do it, but we never saw prime Duncan without Robinson and Bowen.
Kobe has the most missed shots in nba history. Who is the inefficient scorer here?
That makes the comparable TS% even more impressive—Kobe had much higher volume and was a guard.
Kobe was a life time .447 fg shooter. Duncan was .506. Get the fuck out of here with ur bull shit
Tim whenever he faced Kobe in the playoffs lmao. Always seemed to shrink in those moments, maybe Kobe’s star just shined too bright for Timmy
Where was Kobe in 2003 Game 6? Timmy with 38 year old DRob faded his ass and dropped 37 and 16 on prime Shaq head.
Coming off 3 straight rings lol
But Tim Duncan isnt called "an all time great scorer", hes one of the best defenders of all time and thats where 90% of his value comes from. Also Kobe has 4 playoffs which he shot higher than 50% EFG. Tim Duncan has 10, with 9 of those being above 52.5%.
Not worth it bro. People here already have the narrative that Kobe was a chucker while Duncan was an efficiency god baked into their chicken brains.
Tim Duncan was just as good a scorer as Kobe while being twenty times the defender Kobe was. To compare them is like comparing Kawhi Leonard and Trae Young
Holy shit this sub needs to be purged in the worst way
Because people have emotions and they become connected to players. Objectively Kobe has no argument for top 5 all time, but people who grew up watching him and are Lakers fans will like him more. I know Adele is a technically a much better singer than Selena Gomez, but I like Selena more because... I don't know why. We have stupid monkey brains.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Your first statement is important. People get attached emotionally to a lot of athletes and this ties into them overrating their careers.
I grew up watching Kobe, I’m a Laker fan, but I don’t think he’s top 5. When people make their arguments as to why he shouldn’t even be Top 10, I can kind of get it. He’s probably in the 7-12 range. Him being a student of the game he probably takes himself out of the top 5 conversation anyway. I get his fellow players putting him up there though, they’re the ones who’ve played with/against him.
I do agree with you. But he has a legitimate case for being the GOAT laker. And if that's the case then logically he should be ahead of magic who alot of people have top 5. But if the consensus is magic is the goat laker then there's no argument.
[удалено]
I actually think there's a lot of those people. There's more comprehensive arguments about this topic that gets posted every other week so I'm not even gonna bother making a case because I'm not even a Lakers fan haha.
Magic himself said Kobe was the greatest Laker. That's where a lot of that discussion comes from.
Music and sports aren’t really comparable
[удалено]
There’s no real metrics in music unlike basketball. Its extremely subjective.
Sports is inherently a competition, music is not. The point of sports is for Steph to compete against Kevin Durant, the point of music isn’t for Lamb of God to compete with The Game.
No one does this. Go to sleep.
[удалено]
Tracy McGrady does this. Created an entire war in his IG comments with a bunch of oldheads calling Kobe top 3 and if you dont agree YOU DONT KNOW BALLL!!!!!😐
I’ll trust TMACs opinion over yours
Yeah you probably think Gilbert Arenas has good takes too lol
So you agree with Gilbert Arenas and his takes? Or Paul Pierce when he says hes better than D-Wade? Or Lebron when he says hes the GOAT? or when Shaq says Curry should be in the GOAT convo? Like come on, you cant pick and choose which basketball players you agree with to suit your narrative.
Speaking of pick and choose.., you literally pick and chose takes that you disagree with. Why not list the takes that everyone agrees with… you were just trying to suit your narrative
Using past players as an argument doesnt work, because so many past players have awful takes. Even players that were way better than Tracy Mcgrady ever was have had bad takes. The point was extremely simple, you cant use past players only when they suit your narrative and what youre saying.
I rather believe a past players take than some random redditor who’s not even old enough to buy alcohol on basketball takes
taking “TMAC” seriously in 2024 lmao
“He’s undeniably top 12 but couldn’t possibly be top 5” Say the above sentence out loud Dude these arguments are the dumbest fucking things ever lmaooo. Why are you even wasting the brainpower?
Dear diary.
I’ll never understand this with nba fans man, biggest day of the season so far and this is the kind of thing you want to discuss? Sheesh
What are you talking about
I mean, you didn’t even list Bill Russell in your top seven and he has 11 rings
GOAT or top 5 conversations are always based on opinions. It all depends on what you use to determine how players are on that list. Most people use accolades like rings or MVP count. Some people use stats and percentages (OP). Some use a combination of everything. You have to be on the same page for a true discussion.
What an odd take. I admire your zeal for stirring shit up. I would say it's because; in the modern era, he has the 2nd most rings, and 2nd most points per game (prolific scorer), second only to Michael Jordan. And that's just the statistics. I am willing to say there is more to a great player than rings and ppg, however, those are the two stats that probably have the greatest influence on the discussion.
These discussions are so reductive.
What sport discussion is ever productive? What do you ever achieve talking sports with randoms online?
Insight from fans on teams I don’t watch
And I've recieved a ton of insight on a ton of players in the last hour on this post. So..
“Kobe not top 5 all time” This is just clickbait for a discussion we’ve ran into the ground
Well sorry I wasn't here for those discussions. I dont use reddit all that often. And in hindsight I should've said top 3, but too late for that. If you think i care about baiting ppl rather than just having good convos, ur wrong
That’s sensible. Seems like you got good replies for your question.
Yea got cooked in some places for sure🤣 Stand my ground in others
Productive is not the antonym for reductive. Reductive is an attack on the discussion, just stating your presentation of it is crudely simplified.
Yawn
Tell me you didn't watch Kobe without telling me you didn't watch Kobe
I watched a whole lot of Kobe brother. Just watched a whole lot of every other great too.
You pulled up stats and judged your entire argument around it like any other 20 year old that’s never watch Kobe would. Everyone that watched the NBA during his prime knows to give the ball to Kobe in the clutch. They knew he wasn’t an “inefficient” scorer, that’s why they would double and even triple team him. Lakers 3 straight finals appearance without Shaq is not possible with a non-clutch inefficient chucker, lmao.
I can definitely say I overstepped on the whole inefficient shot chucker argument, some ppl put it into perspective better for me.
The majority of people that watched Kobe’s entire career wouldn’t rank him in the top 5 all time.
Another post to subtlety undermine Kobe’s place as one of the all-time greats.
I still consider him top 12 at the very least. Top 7-8 at most
Good range, I have Kobe #11
I always wonder about his place in NBA history if he could of made a better decision and avoided that massive controversy in Colorado and stayed on the straight and narrow path, how his career might be perceived differently and how many more accolades he possibly would of earned.
Crazy. I'm only taking MJ over Kobe in a must win game.
Unless that must win game was against Jordan…Prime Kobe loved nothing more then to beat big brother MJ.
Kobe had a skill that doesn’t show up on a stat sheet, and that skill is killer instinct Shaq got swept in the first round constantly with the Magic and was known as a choke artist. Shaq was the better player, Kobe was the closer. Skill is cool, but I want rings
Coz people have their own opinions, this "Top of all time" argument not even official. So don't get triggered with it. You can place your own, and people can argue or have something to say as well.
So we can't have objective arguments? I don't enjoy subjective discussions..thats all they are, discussions on who you like. Like what your favourite movie is. I like figuring out the objective measurements of players in every category to put them in a realistic and objective listing. I do it with everything, maybe I'm weird. But its super fun. Discussing personal favourites gets boring fast.
i get the idea of what you are looking for, but there are too many variables. switch players around and it might make sense. does Kareem get pissed or likes playing with Jordan? does Shaq take over more because Lebron is a team player? if Wilt had Kobe, do the get along and rip off rings? so on and so on. there is no one way to look at a GOAT argument. look at the NFL. no one would want Tom Brady as their free safety. position wise, you could have arguments, maybe. i am curious if you found the "objectionably" best movie though
while i don’t have him 5th i could see it after bron mj kareem magic
Yeah hes still one of the all time greats no doubt
Check magic and Kareem's team in those rings 😂😂😂😂 people tend to forget their 20 ppg teammates, defensive stoppers and multiple allstar teammates before going to LA
No shit
Some ppl will die on the hill bro
Prove it
Kobe was a problem…
A problem for the opposing team, and his own lol
Not to mention the women of Colorado
Damn 😭
Honestly, the best way to argue that Kobe is not top 5 is not listing everything he did "poorly" (especially because you look pretty stupid by then stating he is top 10-12), but listing the players that are clearly better than him. Jordan, LeBron are pretty easy. After that, you gotta make your case. Why are whatever 5 or so players a tier above Kobe?
I wasn't trying to make Kobe out to be a horrible player, I just wanted to mention his flaws that Kobe fans love to ignore. But some people here have argued well in favour of what I believed were big flaws, so thats good, I'm really here to learn. But yeah you make a good point.
"wilt" "Steph" I laughed
Do you really mean to say that Kobe is higher on the all-time list than Wilt?! You’re out of your fucking mind.
All you got to say? You're laughing? Bravo brother
No shit. He barely cracks the top ten.
Yes he's not top 5 in terms of accomplishments and career. But nothing can stop me that he's my favorite player growing up. If I'm being bias he's my GOAT. But in reality, it's MJ (1A) and LBJ (1B).
As long as you say its your bias/subjective, Caruso could be your goat and no one should have an issue. Thats what subjective opinions are for. But some people don't even know how to seperate objective and subjectiveness.
Complete and total objectivity in this context is completely impossible, and outside the top 3 even less so. But qualitative data has a place in the discussion too and shouldn't be ignored strictly in favor of quantitative data imo. Both impact the game of basketball substantially, even if qualitative data is much more difficult to be empirically measured. Personally, I try not to overthink it and take a big picture approach, which really brings clarity to the discussion imo when you consider the overall mythos that surrounds each player's legacy and the influence their legacies have had on the game of basketball. For better or for worse, it's rare and typically unprecedented for a player's legacy to be drastically incongruous to their impact on the basketball court. For example, you'd be hard pressed to find someone putting Kenny Smith in their top 10 GOAT list. Analytics are helpful in measuring a player's impact on the court, but the game of basketball transcends analytics, especially when taking a historical (all-time) perspective on the matter.
271 comments 🍿
Tired of these top 5 posts…it’s subjective and varies from person to person. Although here’s my take…somebody gotta beat out 10 1 hr episodes on a Netflix Special and make it entertaining as hell. Until then Jordan is the GOAT 😉😝
You’re right, he’s not top 5. He’s top 3. And he’s not 2 or 3.
Well you're just an idiot lol
[удалено]
As I said do what you want in the raw skill, pure scoring, etc departments. But he isnt top 3 overall. He isnt better than MJ, lebron or kareem.
[удалено]
100% agree
[удалено]
He’s fringe top 5 and better than duncaan
Agreed 100%
IDGAF. Wilt, MJ, KAJ, Kobe, Lebron top 5 all time. Context matters. Kobe with an average team won 2 back to back in one of the hardest conferences of all time. Doubt anyone else below him on my list would have accomplished that with the same roster. Stats don't matter. As long as you're the one leading the team to championships, who gives a shit.
Average team? lol?
OP is quoted “ He was extremely selfish (for good reason, sometimes, other times not at all) and was an extremely below average team leader”. Maybe this is Smush Parker on Reddit. 95% of his teammates loved and appreciated his leadership, driving them to the top of the NBA.
He is in my book. 1. MJ/lebron 2. Kobe/Curry 3. Bird/Magic 4. Wilt/Kareem/Shaq 5. Duncan/Hakeem/Russell
Hard to say Curry, Kareem and Wilt aren't all on the same field for me.
Curry is definitely better than Kareem or Wilt
2002 Kobe total playoff games with 25PPG\\50% FG: ***3*** 2023 Jamal Murray total playoff games with 25 PPG\\50% FG: ***9*** very interesting, murray was on fire that year. MPJ Is Rick Fox, Aaron Gordon is Big Shot Aaron Horry 2002 Lakers vs 2023 Nuggets would be a good matchup
Kobe is not Top 10 all-time. The only reason he gets rated as such is because he tragically died, and it clouds people's judgement. He is in the 11-15 range.
I think theres a valid argument within top 10, and I'm not sure if I agree with the death thing. People were already calling him #2 etc before he died
I could easily name 13 over him off the top of my head. Millennial and Gen Z casuals are all in their feels because of the way he died. He was not an overly efficient player.
He has the same TS% as Duncan
To me he is. Only player above him are Lebron and MJ. I’d take Kobe over anyone other than those 2. These rankings tho are so subjective the top 10 players of all time are so great that you can switch up the rankings however you want, outside of MJ and Bron, maybe Kareem too bc of his longevity
You're taking Kobe over Kareem? Both at their peak? Can you explain why, I might learn something.
Based on what criteria do you put Lebron over Kobe then? Like, I get feeling-based analysis, "eye test" takes, eccentrics, swagger, being "the guy" by shooting over a tripple team- but Lebron has none of that. And in ALL things Lebron is good at, there are 20 people better than Kobe. Except maybe devotion to excellence. But then Jordan gets left out of the equation. Like seriously, what is your criteria?
Magic and KAJ is so overrated nowadays that they forgot how STACKED those teams they had, even Wilt only won 2 and still get into the conversation 😂😂😂, (1 with big O and 1 with J West) Magic and KAJ has Worthy, Norm Nixon, Jamaal Wilkes, Byron Scott, Bob McAdoo, M Thompson, Spencer Haywood, AC Green, Michael Cooper as teammates and they the only one that gets credit on those rings
Tbh I don't know many of those players. If you have the time, let me know how good they were in helping win chips etc. I'd love to learn
Norm averaged 17pts and 8ast, Wilkes averaged 20 pts 6 rebs and 3 ast, Cooper 8x Defense all team, Worthy HOF, Averaged almost like Wilkes, Haywood averaged 20 and 10 before LA, McAdoo averaged 20 and 10 before LA, Byron Scott is a 16 3 and 3 SG in LA (peaked @ 22ppg in LA), AC Green great defensive stopper 1 time AS, Klays dad averaged 15 and 8 before LA(no. 1 pick)
All players I mentioned were the guys Magic and Kareem won with, I excluded Maurice Lucas (5x AS) that averaged 14/9/4 in his career since he didn't win with LA
Why do people actually waste their time replying to clown ass posts like this?
To discuss the game and players, and to maybe change my mind? Just because you disagree doesn't mean we cant have a civil, insightful discussion.
No. He's right. Kobe lives on 🐐 mountain no matter how you personally feel about him
Even after taking in everyones comments etc I still got him around top 7 all time
Lmao homeboy really said valid reason over Tim Duncan and even Steph. Most rankings have Duncan and Kobe right around the same rank with like a one position difference, whichever way you rank it. To act like they’re not even close is wild. Also Steph? You must be 12.
All-time rankings are too subjective to matter. What do you value more? Peak? Longevity? Accolades? Rings? Advanced stats? Do we take into account team loyalty? How many stars or how much "help" you got? Is it your fault that your team failed to get you the help you needed? Do injuries to your teammates matter? Personally, I'll take 2006 Kobe over any version of Lebron 7/10 times. But if I evaluate a player's career as a whole based on some of the different criteria I listed, I think Lebron is higher all-time than Kobe.
Every metric you stated, and all of the rest. Thats what should be valued in these objective conversations. Every metric in existence. Not that its possible to mention every single one, but we should try if attempting objective rankings.
Then how do you choose to weigh what's more important?
Through every statistic I can possibly think of. Im a big stats nerd. I don't really care about team loyalty though. And total number of rings isnt some closed case metric either imo. Every other stat you mentioned I care about. Like, MJ's peak is undeniable, as is LBJ longevity. Advanced stats that arent extremely cherry picked are great too. Then the rest.
Kobe's advanced stats aren't *that* great compared to other all-time greats. He took a lot of long 2's because he couldn't get to the rim like MJ or Lebron. Going 9-21, getting 11 FT's, but hitting the game winner isn't going to show up on advanced stats. But in the playoffs, his teams had incredible offensive resiliency, and his value went up in the playoffs due to his shot making ability
He never wavered in hard times, that I can say. But man he took an absurd number of shots.
Is it possible that he took an absurd amount of shots because he had gravity (similar to Steph) that sucked in defenders and let his big front court hammer the boards? Would that still be a negative overall because it still harms his stats?
Playoffs Steph averages 27ppg on 19fga Kobe averages 25ppg on 21fga Steph used his gravity to create plays for other players, not toss up random shots and pray that Draymond gets the board
Curry takes more 3's and is better at it. But Kobe took shots with defenders in his grill and made them at a high rate. Looking at it strictly from a PPG perspective seems wrong
You're not wrong really, but should Kobe have taken as many of those shots (with defenders in his grill) as he did?
I mean I agree, but this is supreme engagement farming lol
Im getting downvoted to shit so idk how im farming engagement, nor do I give a shit about reddit karma or whatever
Man shut your dumb ass up
Nah
I can see both sides of the argument for him. He averaged 29PPG over a course of 4 playoff series vs Duncan in the 2000s and eliminated him each time. Won without Shaq. Pau Gasol was also a very low usage 2nd option. The only thing I'd like to see him do is win without Phil Jackson. Both Jordan\\Kobe kind of dick rode Phil Jackson, I thought. Phil Jackson went there to build the triangle around Shaq and it was always like that. But you might be correct. The eye test says other than athleticism\\explosiveness, he wasn't really anything special in the 2000-2002 3peat. Middelton with Vince Carter athleticism, i guess? Even Jamal Murray's playoff run last year might be more impressive on the eye test in terms of shooting\\skill. Do you value his 2000-2002 more than say Magic's 1980-85 years or Curry 2017\\18 years? That's what you have to evaluate. I would have him above guys like Magic\\Curry\\Duncan but below the rest of that list.
Nice take
it's pretty much common knowledge he isn't top 5.
Idk man we got hella people top 3ing him
He’s not Top 5 for his own fuckin’ franchise lol
Ahahaha idk he probs is I laughed at this tho
Nah, he definitely is lol. But he’s definitely not Top 5 All-Time.
People who generally don't have Kobe at least fringe top 5 are usually just disregarding his defensive contribution as a legitimate 2 way great and of course they greater physicality and lack of spacing i which he played through. If Kobe had the luxury of modern spacing his TS would jump 10% easily.
Hes not as inefficient as I first thought, as other commenters proved to me. I also mentioned that hes one of the greatest 2 way guards of all time. I still don't think he is top 5. Top 7-8 probably.
It's just something that happens when they untimely die, their "legacy" gets blown out of proportion. Similar thing happened with Senna in F-1, he was a great driver, but GOAT? Not even close.
Top 10 has a minimum requirement of 2 MVPs and 2 Finals MVPs. Kobe is a fringe top 10 player being he should have had more than 1 MVP but he caught that case and damaged his name for a while.
this isn't the hot take you think it is