I think it makes the most sense to think of the NBA greats in terms of eras.
50s and earlier --

60s - Bill Russell and the Celts owned this era ... Wilt was a frequent nemesis
70s - Jerry West, Kareem, Oscar Robertson and later Doctor J
80s - Bird vs Magic ... Isiah Thomas on the tail end
90s - Jordan, with a bit of Hakeem, Ewing, and David Robinson
00s - Kobe & Shaq vs Duncan and Nash ... Garnett and Dirk on the tail end. To me Duncan is the signature player here.
10s - LeBron is the signature player here, with Curry's Warriors also a headliner ... Harden and Durant deserve mention
When I look at it this way, Kobe is clearly one of the "signature names" when you're talking about the history of the NBA. But during his era, he was just one of a half dozen or so guys who defined the league.
Within his own era, Kobe was beloved / hated and had an enormous cultural impact. However I would argue that his impact on the court was less than Shaq and Duncan. I think you could also argue that Nash (with D'Antoni) had a greater hand in influencing where the style of play leaguewide was headed. Kobe was more of a holdover of the older 90s era style of play.
I tend to think that any of the guys who defined their era -- Russell, Kareem, Bird & Magic, Jordan, Duncan, and LeBron -- has an argument for a spot near the top of the list, if not the very top. In some ways it's kind of silly to argue differences between them. The game and the league has changed a great deal over the years, and continues to change.
I don't think Kobe belongs in the same conversation as those guys, though. He's a step above guys like Isiah, Malone, Garnett, Dirk, and Nash, probably a step below Shaq, Wilt, and Hakeem.
Lots of book left to be written on Curry, Durant, Harden, Giannis.