A. Sherod Blakely has Kobe on his Mount Rushmore

[crimson_stallion]

Ha what a moron

Would take

Kareem
Shaq
Hakeem
Duncan
Robinson
Lebron
Bird
Magic

before Kobe .

It's perfectly fair to disagree with somebody, but to call him a Moron is a bit silly.

As Celtics fans it is normal for us to hate Kobe because he's a lifetime Laker, but to not respect what he has achieved in the league is extremely narrow minded.

Kobe has is just about to (or just did?) overtake Jordan as #3 on the All-Time scoring list, and he's right up there with Jordan in terms of championships too so you can't criticise him for not being a winner.  He's the only player in NBA history to record 30,000 points ad 6,000 assists for his career.   The guy has just come back from an ACL injury at age 36 and is leading the league in scoring.  He's made how many all star games, how many MVP titles, how many All Defensive Teams?  Is there really a single player in this entire league who is as hard working, determined, as motivated and as tough (both physically and mentally) as Kobe is? 

Also as much as everybody LOVES to say Kobe had more help then MJ, did he really?  MJ did not win a single championship until Pippen arrived, and he had Pippen by his side for every title he won.  Kobe had Shaq during the first three championship seasons, but the last three were all on him.

Again we can dislike the guy, but it's not right to disrespect him.  No matter what anybody says, his achievements are right up there with MJ.

[crimson_stallion]

Isn't there an unwritten rule that if you're a Boston journalist you pick Bird? I'm not asking for everyone to be Tommy, and I understand that there are 6-8 guys who have a legit claim to be in the top 4. It's a more practical issue. You're a Celtics media guy, you pick Bird.

I mean, if I saw a Lakers broadcast and the guy picked Bird instead of Kobe, I'd think he was high.

  I think it's more that Boston journalist like to leave Bird out to show they aren't afraid to go against the grain. As for Kobe, his only argument for inclusion on lists like this is longevity, not level of play. But even with that he's a fairly uninformed choice.

How has Kobe been any less impressive than Bird or Magic in terms of his level of play? 

Does he not have at least as many rings as either of those guys?  Are his statistical numbers not pretty much right up there?

Also I'm not sure I put Wilt on that list.  No disrespect to him, but Wilt was a 7'0" 260 pound guy playing in an era where every other center was 6'8" and 220 pounds.  The guy had zero competition.  It was like putting the Hulk up against Black Widow.

I'm not denying he was great, but his dominance is undoubtedly exaggerated by the era he played in.

Bill Russel was an amazing player but he wasn't  a phenomenal scorer.  He was a absolutely dominate rebounder and defensive player, who could also score consistently.  Think Dwight Howard - dominant defender and rebounder, and will put 18 points on the board every night...but not the most offensively skilled or player out there.  Am I disrespecting Bill?  Not at all.

Just saying we need to look at guys not for how many titles they have or how dominate their stats were at the time, but also for their actual skill set.

Hakeem is, to me, the one man who will always be on that list.  He is the one player in history who is almost without flaw.  The guy was an elite scorer, an elite rebounder, an elite defender, and an elite big man passer.  The guy stuffed the box scores in every way imaginable and is the only player in history to record two career quadruple doubles.  He also played in an era that may have been the most competitive in NBA history in terms of quality centers - he was going up against Shaq, Robinson, Ewing, Mourning, Mutombo, Smits, Sabonis...and he when he went one on one against those guys he dominated almost every one of them.

Magic and Bird - honestly, I've got to have them up there too.  Magic was a PG who was capable of not only playing, but DOMINATING at the center spot.  That is unheard of even to this day.  There may have never been a player more versatile than Magic in the history of the NBA. 

Bird wasn't far off - he was a guy entirely void of athleticism, yet he is one of the leagues all time leaders in triple doubles.  It blows my mind that he was able to dominate games in every imaginable way despite having the body of a 40 year old.

I would not put Duncan anywhere near that list however.  My lord...he's never even been the best player in his era, let alone top 5 all time.  Duncan's noteworthy achievements have all been team achievements, not individual.  If you look at his stats, his talent level, it's skill level, his versatility - he doesn't come close to guys like Hakeem, Magic, Bird, Jordan, etc.  Duncan is an excellent player who excelled because he plays within himself, and because he has an incredibly high IQ...but he has never had any special skill or talent level that separates him from a billion other fantastic big men that have come and gone over the years.  Honestly, what can Tim Duncan do that Patrick Ewing, or David Robinson, or Hakeem, or Marc Gasol, or KG, or even Rasheed Wallace COULDN'T do?  Absolutely nothing.  The only fact anyone can ever produce to back Duncan is the number of rings he has, which is entirely a team achievement - and even in that regard he's still behind Kobe.

Duncan is one of the best power forwards to ever play, but he's ridiculously overrated.

[Neurotic Guy]

Let's put it this way:  if Kobe is on Mount Rushmore, he is Teddy Roosevelt.

[Celtics4ever]

Kobe is hurting his legacy by becoming the volume score that he is nowadays.  His shooting is down but he chucks up 20+ shots every game and usually makes less than half of them.

if Kobe is on Mount Rushmore

He is the detritus at the bottom.

de•tri•tus (d??tra? t?s)

n.   1. rock in small particles or other material worn or broken away from a mass, as by the action of water or glacial ice.  2. any disintegrated material; debris.

[greece66]

It's fitting that one team has both the most overrated all-time great (Kobe) and the most underrated (Kareem).

Mike

What you said was really nasty. I liked it.

[Jailan34]

Isn't there an unwritten rule that if you're a Boston journalist you pick Bird? I'm not asking for everyone to be Tommy, and I understand that there are 6-8 guys who have a legit claim to be in the top 4. It's a more practical issue. You're a Celtics media guy, you pick Bird.

I mean, if I saw a Lakers broadcast and the guy picked Bird instead of Kobe, I'd think he was high.

  I think it's more that Boston journalist like to leave Bird out to show they aren't afraid to go against the grain. As for Kobe, his only argument for inclusion on lists like this is longevity, not level of play. But even with that he's a fairly uninformed choice.

How has Kobe been any less impressive than Bird or Magic in terms of his level of play? 

Does he not have at least as many rings as either of those guys?  Are his statistical numbers not pretty much right up there?

Also I'm not sure I put Wilt on that list.  No disrespect to him, but Wilt was a 7'0" 260 pound guy playing in an era where every other center was 6'8" and 220 pounds.  The guy had zero competition.  It was like putting the Hulk up against Black Widow.

I'm not denying he was great, but his dominance is undoubtedly exaggerated by the era he played in.

Bill Russel was an amazing player but he wasn't  a phenomenal scorer.  He was a absolutely dominate rebounder and defensive player, who could also score consistently.  Think Dwight Howard - dominant defender and rebounder, and will put 18 points on the board every night...but not the most offensively skilled or player out there.  Am I disrespecting Bill?  Not at all.

Just saying we need to look at guys not for how many titles they have or how dominate their stats were at the time, but also for their actual skill set.

Hakeem is, to me, the one man who will always be on that list.  He is the one player in history who is almost without flaw.  The guy was an elite scorer, an elite rebounder, an elite defender, and an elite big man passer.  The guy stuffed the box scores in every way imaginable and is the only player in history to record two career quadruple doubles.  He also played in an era that may have been the most competitive in NBA history in terms of quality centers - he was going up against Shaq, Robinson, Ewing, Mourning, Mutombo, Smits, Sabonis...and he when he went one on one against those guys he dominated almost every one of them.

Magic and Bird - honestly, I've got to have them up there too.  Magic was a PG who was capable of not only playing, but DOMINATING at the center spot.  That is unheard of even to this day.  There may have never been a player more versatile than Magic in the history of the NBA. 

Bird wasn't far off - he was a guy entirely void of athleticism, yet he is one of the leagues all time leaders in triple doubles.  It blows my mind that he was able to dominate games in every imaginable way despite having the body of a 40 year old.

I would not put Duncan anywhere near that list however.  My lord...he's never even been the best player in his era, let alone top 5 all time.  Duncan's noteworthy achievements have all been team achievements, not individual.  If you look at his stats, his talent level, it's skill level, his versatility - he doesn't come close to guys like Hakeem, Magic, Bird, Jordan, etc.  Duncan is an excellent player who excelled because he plays within himself, and because he has an incredibly high IQ...but he has never had any special skill or talent level that separates him from a billion other fantastic big men that have come and gone over the years.  Honestly, what can Tim Duncan do that Patrick Ewing, or David Robinson, or Hakeem, or Marc Gasol, or KG, or even Rasheed Wallace COULDN'T do?  Absolutely nothing.  The only fact anyone can ever produce to back Duncan is the number of rings he has, which is entirely a team achievement - and even in that regard he's still behind Kobe.

Duncan is one of the best power forwards to ever play, but he's ridiculously overrated.

An extremely reasonable viewpoint in a Celticsblog forum post about Kobe's greatness?? Pinch me, I must be dreaming.

[D.o.s.]

I'm not denying he was great, but his dominance is undoubtedly exaggerated by the era he played in.

Just saying we need to look at guys not for how many titles they have or how dominate their stats were at the time, but also for their actual skill set.

These two paragraphs indicate, to me, that you should watch more Wilt Chamberlain footage.

If anything, Chamberlain is underrated because of the era he played in.

[BballTim]

Isn't there an unwritten rule that if you're a Boston journalist you pick Bird? I'm not asking for everyone to be Tommy, and I understand that there are 6-8 guys who have a legit claim to be in the top 4. It's a more practical issue. You're a Celtics media guy, you pick Bird.

I mean, if I saw a Lakers broadcast and the guy picked Bird instead of Kobe, I'd think he was high.

  I think it's more that Boston journalist like to leave Bird out to show they aren't afraid to go against the grain. As for Kobe, his only argument for inclusion on lists like this is longevity, not level of play. But even with that he's a fairly uninformed choice.

How has Kobe been any less impressive than Bird or Magic in terms of his level of play? 

  For starters,  he's less of an all-around player. Also, he never achieved the level of dominance that they did. Bird won 3 straight MVPs and finished 1st or 2nd 7 times. Magic won 3 in 3 years and finished 1st or 2nd 5 times. Kobe finished first once and 2nd once. The only real reason you can try to talk about Kobe and Larry/Magic in the same sentence is because he had so many more healthy seasons than either of them did.

[Csfan1984]

I'm not denying he was great, but his dominance is undoubtedly exaggerated by the era he played in.

Just saying we need to look at guys not for how many titles they have or how dominate their stats were at the time, but also for their actual skill set.

These two paragraphs indicate, to me, that you should watch more Wilt Chamberlain footage.

If anything, Chamberlain is underrated because of the era he played in.

I agree with D.o.s.,
Wilt was Shaq before Shaq. And was twice the athlete Shaq was. Wilt is arguably the GOAT and could dominate any era. Especially one that allows so much traveling, palming and calls touch fouls like today. As a fan look up Wilt videos as well as stories and be amazed.

[Csfan1984]

I know everyone has their opinions but I'm going
Wilt, Kareem, Jordan, LeBron*.

*Projecting one more ring and 4 more dominating years.

[kozlodoev]

Isn't there an unwritten rule that if you're a Boston journalist you pick Bird? I'm not asking for everyone to be Tommy, and I understand that there are 6-8 guys who have a legit claim to be in the top 4. It's a more practical issue. You're a Celtics media guy, you pick Bird.

I mean, if I saw a Lakers broadcast and the guy picked Bird instead of Kobe, I'd think he was high.

  I think it's more that Boston journalist like to leave Bird out to show they aren't afraid to go against the grain. As for Kobe, his only argument for inclusion on lists like this is longevity, not level of play. But even with that he's a fairly uninformed choice.

How has Kobe been any less impressive than Bird or Magic in terms of his level of play? 

  For starters,  he's less of an all-around player. Also, he never achieved the level of dominance that they did. Bird won 3 straight MVPs and finished 1st or 2nd 7 times. Magic won 3 in 3 years and finished 1st or 2nd 5 times. Kobe finished first once and 2nd once. The only real reason you can try to talk about Kobe and Larry/Magic in the same sentence is because he had so many more healthy seasons than either of them did.

Kobe has 9 (nine) first-team all-defense  selections. Bird has three second teams, or something. There is a good argument to be made about who's more well-rounded, but I think the facts are not on Larry's side here.

[86MaxwellSmart]

Has everyone here lost their minds---Have you forgotten how GREAT Larry Bird was--?
He was the Greatest player of the Greatest decade in NBA History.

Magic won a couple more rings--cause his team was from the Horrible West-and didn't have to go through teams like Detroit, Philly, Chicago, Milwaukee and Atlanta, just to GET to the Finals....Almost Every year--it was Dallas, Golden State (Sleepy Floyd was their Best player).

Bird
Magic
Jordan
Russell

Bird and Magic would both be the Best players right now....They could do it all.

[MBunge]

The only fact anyone can ever produce to back Duncan is the number of rings he has, which is entirely a team achievement - and even in that regard he's still behind Kobe.

Duncan is one of the best power forwards to ever play, but he's ridiculously overrated.

Duncan gets the nod here.  He was The Man on at least 3 and maybe 4 of his title teams.  You can maybe give Kobe that credit for one of his championships, and that's a stretch.

Mike

[guava_wrench]

I give Kareem credit for his insane level of play coupled with his extraordinary longevity, plus his positive impact on society off the court. If there was ever one person who I wish wasn't a Laker, it'd be him.

Also, I can't go with just four. Not even remotely.

I can't put someone on Mount Rushmore due to longevity. I will give them credit though for Airplane!

[BballTim]

Isn't there an unwritten rule that if you're a Boston journalist you pick Bird? I'm not asking for everyone to be Tommy, and I understand that there are 6-8 guys who have a legit claim to be in the top 4. It's a more practical issue. You're a Celtics media guy, you pick Bird.

I mean, if I saw a Lakers broadcast and the guy picked Bird instead of Kobe, I'd think he was high.

  I think it's more that Boston journalist like to leave Bird out to show they aren't afraid to go against the grain. As for Kobe, his only argument for inclusion on lists like this is longevity, not level of play. But even with that he's a fairly uninformed choice.

How has Kobe been any less impressive than Bird or Magic in terms of his level of play? 

  For starters,  he's less of an all-around player. Also, he never achieved the level of dominance that they did. Bird won 3 straight MVPs and finished 1st or 2nd 7 times. Magic won 3 in 3 years and finished 1st or 2nd 5 times. Kobe finished first once and 2nd once. The only real reason you can try to talk about Kobe and Larry/Magic in the same sentence is because he had so many more healthy seasons than either of them did.

Kobe has 9 (nine) first-team all-defense  selections. Bird has three second teams, or something. There is a good argument to be made about who's more well-rounded, but I think the facts are not on Larry's side here.

  Bird's at least in the discussion for best passer of all time, he's arguably the best shooter ever and he's probably the best rebounding SF ever. His "weakness" is something that he was seen as among the best in the league at his position in multiple times. There's not much of an argument about who was more well rounded, and it wasn't Kobe.