Hakeem is a worse player on the court overall but would have one more title but significantly less achievements elsewhere and it around 9-11. Lebron should be firmly in 5-8
this post was submitted on 24 Nov 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)
NBA - Main
12 readers
1 users here now
Game analysis, highlights and everything else that is happening in the NBA.
founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
Lebron be placed firmly at 5 with 1 ring and 1 MVP makes no sense.
Kobe has 5 rings, 4x All Star MVP, 2x FMVP, 18x All Star, 11x All Star 1st Team, 12x All Defensive, 9x All Defensive 1st Team (most in NBA history), 2x scoring champion, 4th most points in history, 2nd most assists as a guard, and this sub for whatever reason thinks that resume isn't enough to be higher than 7 or 8, even though his resume is stronger than half the players in the top 10.
It seems short-sighted to diminish a guy's legacy because the people around him weren't as good as the people on other teams. I think rings are probably the least precise way to measure how good someone is at basketball.
Nah what separates the top tier all time greats to the next group is rings because their accolades are pretty much close to each other.
When you put it like that seems like what separates the top tier all time greats and the next group is almost solely based off of who had better teammates
Because Kobe for all his resume has clear flaws as a player.
Lebron probably would still be top 5-10 based on his longevity.
Also depends on which ring, if it’s his 2016 then it’s probably the greatest ring ever. Even more than Dirk’s.
Because Kobe for all his resume has clear flaws as a player.
Magic literally played no defense and has 0x any All Defense Team nominations but he's consistently ranked top 5.
Is this ranking the actual best players on the court or top 10 most accomplished players ever?
Kobe would be more accomplished but not the actual better player.
team player Lebron wins
Kobe has the deepest bag I've seen, more than Michael, and I think the 2 greatest 1v1 players of all time are Kobe and MJ.
Lebron is the better player if 5v5, Kobe is the better player 1v1. I think everyone agrees with that.
Kobe isn't better than the guys above him. People watched these guys play. Kobe is not on that level.
you have to be an idiot to say Kobe is not on that level. Kobe was literally getting double and triple teamed for over a decade. He has beaten the most 50-win teams in the playoffs in NBA history. He was the greatest player of the 2000s.
I like how you ask where he would rank, someone says what they think, and then you proceed to tell them that they're wrong
The reason is that LeBron is a much better basketball player than Kobe. But looking at your posts in this thread it seems like all you can do is run down memorized lists of awards, so of course it makes no sense to you.
To answer your question, though, teams win championships, not players. If LeBron played the same in all of those finals as in reality and his team just lost, his ranking wouldn’t change at all.
Still top5. Regardless of rings he's still the best player who ever played.
Somewhere between Michael Jordan and Jordan Poole.
How fast would Lebron be if he were a bicycle
How much wood could Lebron James chuck if Lebron James could chuck wood?
If Lebron was an elevator would he still be goated compared to the elevators from the 60’-70’s era
With only one ring he wouldn't have 4x fmvp, he'd have 1x. That'd leave him with a lot of accolades with little to show for it other than longevity stats. Getting to the finals that many times would still give him an argument for squeaking in to the top ten, but in the end winning rings matters.
he’d basically be looked at like wilt but with 1 less ring. so you can place him above or below wilt in your top 10-15 i suppose
Having or not having rings doesn't change how good you are at basketball.
While I agree, it's the GREATEST of all time, not the BEST. If we were choosing the BOAT probably no one touches Wilt. The greatest is a different conversation.
I also hate this. Greatest and best are synonymous. If you're talking about accolades and accomplishments it should be almost objective right? Maybe you weigh one accolade better than another but at least it's quantifiable. This is a boring conversation.
What I'm interested in is who is best at playing the game of basketball.
What I'm interested in is who is best at playing the game of basketball.
5v5? Michael Jordan or Larry Bird
1v1? Kobe Bryant
Top ten is kinda pointless metric
LeBron will never be #1 and #2-#10 is pure politics
Depends on the ring. If it was 2016 a lot of people would still rank him top 3 lol.
I saw a few of your other comments and I have sad news to tell you. If LeBron isn’t in the GOAT conversation, then literally no one is. 4 rings, 4 Finals MVPs (should be 5 because he should’ve won when Iggy got his), 4 MVP (could argue he should have 7 right now, and certain people shouldn’t be MVP voters), then you have him being #1 all-time in points (by what will be a large margin when he retires) and #4 all-time in assists.
More points the Kareem + more assists than Magic is absolutely crazy for one player to do.
Some dumbass downvoted this. And you're not even saying lebron IS THE GOAT. Just that he's in the convo... lol
Lebron is the goat btw. They just gotta protect Jordan's legacy for whatever reason.
top 15 player but cant get into top 10 since the conseus top 10 has like 3 rings minimum
It’s tough cus we always talk about that player getting his first ring, and then it’s like when is he getting another? So would we be satisfied with the one? Would be hard to say if he just stayed with Cleveland the entire time and won that one vs the warriors and that was it
1 ring he'd be this generations Wilt Chamberlain... Which is funny because that was the take on him prior to the b2b in Miami.