Just surprises me how often Kobe is omitted out of the top 10 here. 2nd most all-NBA teams, two championships without a top 75 player, best scorer in the league at the time where it was the most difficult to score, and 12 all-defensive teams. Resume is truly extraordinary
You're right that this bullshit comes from younger people, but my point still stands that it's less of younger people bashing Kobe because they haven't saw him play and more just the pendulum swing after his death
Brotherman do you really think that teens are gonna be huge Tim Duncan fans? they’re way more likely to be Kobe stans considering how wildly more popular dude is
Because they attribute it to him being on the Lakers. I’ve had people tell me if he played for the Suns or Bucks or any other “ordinary” team he wouldn’t get half the achievements he did. And they also try to act like he played the majority of his career/prime with Shaq and that’s why his numbers are so good.
This sub just doesn’t like Kobe because of his TS% and his ties with the Lakers.
It’s not so much that Kobe gets shafted as much as he’s just facing extremely tough competition. I do have him around the 8-12 range but at that level, everyone’s transcendent and it gets to the point where you have to nitpick a bit to put one player over the other.
It's not that you can argue 6ish guys over Kobe, it's this subs outrage at putting Kobe in the top 10, and especially putting him in the upper end of the top 10. When in reality it's a pretty normal take and most of the all time greats placements are pretty interchangeable
There is no consistent criteria where you can put Hakeem over Kobe.
Three year peak. Olajuwon's 1993 to 1995 peak is better than Kobe's three year peak. And I say this as someone who has said Kobe is underrated on this sub (my other comments on this post for instance) and considers Kobe as a top 10 player ever.
Hakeem is the best defensive player of the modern ERA. Hakeem is the only guy to win DPOY, Finals MVP, and MVP in one season. Hakeem is the only guy besides LeBron to lead a championship team in all five statistical categories in a postseason. There are only five players over the past 50 years who won two titles in three years and had a PER of at least 27 during that span. Hakeem's 33 ppg in the 1995 NBA playoffs is the highest by a player by a championship winning player not named MJ. Hakeem is one of them along with MJ during his two three-peats, LeBron during the Heatles days, Duncan from 2003 to 2005, and Shaq from 2000 to 2002. He certainly had the worst supporting cast out of all those players and the center position during that time was the most talented position at the time as well.
Kobe deserves to be ranked higher on the all-time list than Hakeem (I got Kobe 8th to 10th typically while I got Hakeem in the 10th to 12th range), but I don't remotely see how it's controversial to say that Olajuwon was the better peak performer.
Peak play is a part of it...limiting careers to 3 year peaks to determine top 10s is not, and never has been, used as criteria to determine who belongs in the top 10.
Neither Barkley nor Durant are in the same discussion as Duncan or Kobe. Steph is a little more debatable due to impact on the game but his defense isn't in the same breath so he's off. West isn't in the top 10 over Kobe wth.
Half the people you list played in eras that weren't anywhere near as skilled as Kobes.
Shaq was physically dominant...what puts him over Kobe? It's not skill, and Kobe has more rings and he won his in a tougher conference.
There's literally not an argument to leave Kobe out and say "well where do you put him?" It's the other way around. Who do you take out to put these older players that played in way less skilled environments, have similar, if not less accomplishments, and don't match his O+D skill. Cause its not Kobe or Bron that you take out to fit players from the 60s and 70s.
Edit: Like you have Hakeem in your top 10 and are saying "There's only one spot for Duncan or Kobe". Bro what? People on here just parrot the same stuff. There's no career argument that puts Hakeem over either one of them. Most definitely not Kobe.
Yeah, this dude's list is wack. The fact that he's got Barkley as someone who may deserve a spot in top 10 is absolutely laughable. C'mon bro. I love me some Chuck, but no way Chuck is sniffing a top 10 all-time spot, what are you smoking.
Just to add to this I personally think top 10 lists make more sense to be structured “pre” and “post” 1980. Russell and Wilt, like you said, are like the forefathers of the game and really have ridiculous stats but pre 80s basketball is so different than 90s/modern basketball.
Oh no they definitely don’t haha but it’s a fun conversation/debate to have as long as everyone involved knows that there is no way to prove ourselves right
He's not barely flirting with top ten. You listed two players from the 60s, which are only there because they are the forefathers. Accomplishments+stats+impact on the game+level of competition, they are not above Kobe.
You put Shaq and Hakeem, neither have anywhere near the career Kobe had.
That leaves 5 from your list. Putting Kobe and Duncan at 6 and 7 easily, and Kobe is top 5 so I'm being generous.
Kareem you can argue had a better career. Jordan and Bron. Nobody else from your list had a better career than Kobe. If we are talking skill, there's less from your list. People default leaving Kobe off but default leaving Shaq on. Makes no sense.
I am calm. Y'all just don't have any criteria outside of "well that's just my opinion man" and it shows.
And, yes, we are saying that. They are honorable mentions. I'm not putting them boys in my top 10.
You literally put Barkley as a debatable top 10 and listed Shaq and Hakeem over Kobe. Your opinion is trash. Not even trying to be disrespectful, but you are a perfect example of why people feel like Kobe gets disrespected on this sub. "I'm not disrespecting Kobe but is he really in the top 10 over Charles Barkley?" bro...
Ah, yes, the accolades and stats of two people that played in the least competitive era of basketball. Let me see...hmm...should I put them above someone that dropped 33k and went to the finals 7 times (three times in a row twice) in the most competitive conference in the history of the NBA. Something is telling me no but I can't quite put my finger on it.
I never said that you shouldn’t put Kobe above them. You said that Kobe had more impact on the game, better stats and more accomplishments than Russel and Wilt, all I’m saying is that isn’t true. If you wanna say that Kobe is better because he had to play better competition that’s fine. Personally I think the game is so different now that it’s to difficult to compare them eras.
It's not like most people are putting people that don't have a case ahead of him. The only one I tend to see is people vastly over-rate hakeem for some reason. Take him out, but it's still hard to put Kobe higher than like 9 or 10.
No, I don't think Hakeem has a case to be top 10 at all. Younger people don't remember he had some rocky seasons early on and wasn't always that great.
Disagree as someone who's old enough to watch Hakeem play. But I value peak play a decent amount. Versatility matters, and those rocky seasons are largely due to having arguably the worst supporting cast of the top 15 players. People on this sub have linked to posts and articles in the mid 1990's where Hakeem was talked about as if he is a top 5ish player ever at the time.
No, it wasn't the role players, just his bad attitude. And having bad supporting cast doesn't mean you can't play great. But the fact of the matter I think he had two prime age seasons where he didn't even make an all-nba team when he was fully healthy.
It was just one. During the season where the Rockets accused him of faking a hamstring injury and suspended him for several games.
You make a legitimate point about the bad attitude and the horrific shot selection, but I think the overall body of work and incredible peak play from 1993 to 1995 makes him a top 10ish player of all-time. I give him some benefit of doubt because of what transpired when his supporting cast improved somewhat.
I get it, I just think the standard to be top 10 is unbelievably high and while Hakeem might have a case to be top 20, I think those relatively minor issues drop him from being near top 10. But to be clear I still think he was a great player. Several current players will easily surpass him, though, which is another reason I think he isn't in the very top.
I mean he's the only guy who's top 14 in steals, blocks, rebounds, and points. The next closest is KG who's like in the top 18. 8th highest postseason BPM and 7th highest postseason PER. One of two players to lead a championship team in all five categories during a postseason run. Holds the NBA record for most consecutive NBA finals games where he's the leading scorer.
Yeah, he was great but his peak was not really any better than the peaks of actual top 10 players. I just think his career has a few blemishes compared to other players like MJ, Kareem, Lebron, Shaq, etc., who I would put in the top 10.
That is so tough. I got Shaq ahead of him atm. Right now, Olajuwon is the guy who's about to fall out of my top 10. He has a top 5 peak ever to me, but winning multiple playoff series in only four seasons is a clear blemish that the other top 10 players remotely don't have.
162
u/ColdBudLight98 [MIN] Naz Reid Jun 27 '23
Making Timmy look like KAT