The most underrated superstar of all-time

For the record, I've followed the NBA since 1994. And I don't think Kobe not receiving any MVP votes in 2004-2005 was that shocking or makes him 'underrated'...Unless you've forgotten he was accused of sexual assault that year and the Lakers missed the playoffs.

I always find it hard to rate wings/guards versus big men. In their era I'd rather Russell and Wilt than Magic or Bird given the game changing nature of an athletic 7" guy. In todays game I'd take the shooter/ball handler

Remember though you saw less basketball back then, opinions were shaped more by a smaller group of jounros and aggregated stats/other views weren't available on via a few key strokes. so in reality most people's view were framed by visual recall of very small portion of their games. There was also really no scope for debating the views outside of your immediate group which are mroe likley than not to be likeminded in how the assess things.

Or Chris Cairns...

I think Kobe is underrated now but it’s mainly because of this kind of narrative during his career. For instance you assert he deserved 4-5 MVPs but don’t really say why. I’ve re read it 5 times now and can’t see where you construct any argument that he should have 3 or 4 more MVP’s. Hell you only stand behind him being the best player (which isn’t the fact you portray it as…) for one season. In 05 he played 66 games. Only two other players with 66 games got votes – Marcus Camby got a single 5th vote and Duncan came 4th overall after being second in PER and top 5 in win shares per 48 and BPM and far exceeded Kobe’s on court value (hell in that year he got more #2 PER finishes than Kobe’s entire career). So it feels like your 12 year grudge hinges on him not getting Marcus Camby’s lone final vote, in which case it’s time to let it go. 2006 I’ll give you he should have been a top 2/3 candidate but missing out on a top three isn’t giving him 3-4 more MVP’s. Kobe is a guy who has only finished top 3 for a season just twice in any of PER, win shares per 48, win shares total, VORP or BPM once in his entire career. And never ever ever did he top a single one of those at any point in his 20 years. 100 opportunities and a big fat zero for #1 (or #2 for that matter). The only advanced stat he’s ever topped is useage rate. Sure catch all stats aren’t mana from heaven but if some guy was literally the best player for 4-5 seasons he’d jag at least a single top two finish during his 20 years right. To me Lenny Bias is as deserving a 4-5 time MVP as Kobe Bryant. For 3 of his 5 rings he was the second best player on his team, hence the other guy (who had 12 #1’s in the same categories that Kobe delivered a grand total of ZERO and a another 17 in the 2-3 range that Kobe delivered a stunning 2) collected 3 Finals MVP’s. The guy who got jibbed out of MVP’s from the purple and gold is not Kobe. It’s the guy who’s statue just went up. In 06-07 he was the best scorer, but he wasn’t far and away the best player. Dirk was a more deserving winner – though Nash shouldn’t have been second (the issue there is Nash = over rated at the time not Kobe under-rated) On the 2010 thing – one small bit of proof is his adjusted defensive +/- says teams scored 0.1 points per 100 possessions more in 2010. Admittedly this is only available freely on the internet at probably the most well known site for basketball information so I can understand how it has escaped you prior to now. Even his actual MVP award year, to me at the time and just reinforced now, felt like a life time achievement award when LeBron had played better (out Kobing Kobe for scoring title + topping a casual 3 of the advanced stats which was three more than Kobe’s career) but hadn’t earned his stripes.

I think Jordan doesn't get the "chucker" because he converted his shots at an above average TS% he took lots of shots, but he converted them like a spot up shooter – that is actually the crux of his greatness.

It's easy to say Kobe deserved 4-5 MVPs because it's true. After years of bashing on Kobe, the media finally said enough is enough, and many still wanted to give to Paul for some reason. 1 MVP for the career Kobe had is pretty bad. Astro, you must be new to the nba, but the overall media has been bashing Kobe constantly for a long time now and still does. They pick and choose who they like/dislike. RW is a current player they dislike, but they're awed by him averaging a triple-double this season, so he might win MVP. When Kobe was far and away the best player in the league(at least in 2006-07), then him not winning MVP is being highly underrated for sure. And it's not just that. As I already said, he earned 0 MVP votes total in 2005, and only finished 4th in 2006 while being left off several ballots completely, which I think voters vote out to 5th place. I mean, huh? Davis has no business winning MVP, and his team is underachieving. RW isn't far and away the best player in the league, in fact, many still say James is. And KD(before injury), Leonard, and Harden are also having spectular seasons. This really isn't the same with Kobe and his mid-2000s LAL teams. How was Kobe voted all-defense in 2010 based on reputation? I hear this myth a lot. Show me some proof for it. I already gave you many examples of him being underrated. Wait, who's wearing the rose-coloured glasses?

I was merely pointing the irony of when people call Kobe a chucker or similar, and how this is just one double standard against him, though not necessarily saying you are doing this. Regardless of whether anyone keeps Jordan is a chucker, rarely would he be called one like Kobe is. I don't think this is a bad thing, actually often a good thing with a player who shoots a lot, but when someone describes a particular player like this it almost always isn't in a good light, and I'm sure you realize this. Not sure what usage/assists have to do with shooting a lot. And do you realize the difference in systems between James and Kobe, right? The triangle is setup for team assists, not individual assists, which we saw with Jordan, too. James also dominates the ball more and plays PG often on offense, unlike Kobe, so with reasons and more one would expect him to have more assists. Kobe wasn't great efficiently, but he was overall solid efficiently. However, he also had to shoot a lot of shots at end of shot clocks, end of quarters, etc., which James much more often wouldn't. If James doesn't have a good look regardless of the situation, he often just passes it or doesn't shoot buzzer beaters, which he's admitted to. And centers aren't geared to shoot these types of shots either. Even just one extra missed shot/game would greatly affect your overall efficiency. Kareem played in a much better offensive efficiency era overall than Kobe, too.

Haha! That's cool...It's really tough to know how great Russell was without ever seeing him, but everything I read about the guy leads me to believe he's top 3. In my mind, because the game was so different back then, comparing stats alone just isn't fair. I think this piece from Bob Ryan (I know, I know...a Boston guy writing in a Boston newspaper about Bill Russell) says it best. He captures how Russell changed the game and how his priority was winning, not numbers. https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/1999/05/26/bill-russell-pride-celtics-center-stage-again/lydlO6RBgV8GqnoQVfcUgN/story.html But if stats matter (which they do), then this one is the best for Bill from that article: "In his final 14 years as a basketball player, Bill Russell’s team participated in 21 winner-take-all contests (nine NCAA tournament games, one Olympic gold medal game, 10 Game 7s, one deciding Game 5), and Bill Russell’s team won all 21"

Its easy to say Kobe 'should' have had 4 or 5 MVPs, but the fact that he has 1 says as much about Kobe's performance on the court, than it does the media apparently disliking him. During some of his peak years, Kobe lead some pretty awful Lakers teams to win totals of 34, 45 and 43. Not many MVPs in the history of the league have been on teams with 500 or less win/loss records. So that's not an example of Kobe being 'underrated' by the media. The same thing will likely happen to Westbrook this year...Great stats on a not so great team. Similar situation for Anthony Davis. Amazing player, great stats, but losing team. You seem to think any criticism of Kobe is 'hate', but I'd say your perceptions of him are biased the other way. You're obviously a big fan of Kobe, which is fine, but in conversations like this, you need to take the rose-coloured glasses off. Kobe is an all-time great, but there's no proof he's underrated. He's mentioned all the time as one of the greats! When/how is he overlooked in the broader conversation about legendary players? As for his defensive prowess, as I said, he was a great defender, but in 2010 he was average. The fact is there were better defenders at the guard position that year, with better statistical measures of their defensive performance. Kobe was voted in on reputation. Just an example of how he was again, not 'underrated'.

I'm no Duke fan but I dislike a lot more things about Kentucky (I sort of follow Louisville - hard though with Kentucky Rick at the helm). I love how Laettner owned the hatred towards him. Respect.

Haha - I did see the last 5-6 years of the skyhook but Kareem had turned into a fossil by then. Eras wise you can only go by the successes players had against other contemporaries. Bill Russell was certainly the dominant figure of his era. It does remind me of a quote from a local sporting immortal; Sir Donald was once asked how he thought he would fair against today's bowlers - the reply "I would only average about 50" to which the reporter asked "but that's only half your career average?". The Don wryly added "but I am 75 years old".

Astro, the 2005/2006 MVP voting are just 2 blatant examples of Kobe being underrated. And just because you're in top 5 in MVP voting every year doesn't mean you aren't being underrated. It's a farce he only won 1 MVP, should have at least 4-5. Nash won 2 MVPs and never made the Finals despite playing with multiple AS on multiple teams while Kobe won 1 MVP. If that's not being underrated, then I don't know what it is. If you don't call it being underrated, then it's hate, which. It's no secret the media didn't like Kobe very much, which funnels into fans' thoughts. That's the difference with defensive all-nba teams, which are voted on by the coaches(the experts). If you think Rose is a better defender than Kobe, then there's no need to argue any further. Kobe had a higher scoring average than Kareem, so obviously he was the better scorer. Kobe had 3 seasons after tearing his achilles which were his 'old man' years, too, same as Kareem. They each played 20 seasons, the difference was that Kobe had 4 'early' years. Kareem had much better teams later on in his career where he could play fewer minutes and conserve energy(similar to Duncan), while not having to be option 1, 2, and 3, like Kobe did late in his career.

Kareem was a more efficient scorer(though most big men are),, but you can't say he was a greater scorer as their career scoring averages indicate, and that's with several things working against Kobe, too, otherwise Kobe would be around 28-30ppg for his career. It's unfortunate the 'chucker' mentality with Kobe still exists with all the negative connotations that go with it. He's one of the top 5 scorers all-time and that's what his team usually needed from him to shoot a lot. Most people would be surprised to know that a supposed 'pass-first" James averages more FGA/game for his career than Kobe. Jordan averaged 3.4 more FGA/game than Kobe, and Kobe only had 2 seasons where he averaged more FGA/game than Jordan's career average of 22.9 FGA/game. But, nobody would call them chuckers.

> Wilt was better than anyone at his best ... apart from Bill Russell.

I rate Julian O'Neill as a footballer. Good player. I've never thought of him as one of the best fullbacks of the 90s to be honest, but I guess you could say that. He was just a nightmare on the booze though, rather than insufferable. As for Kareem, I agree that people didn't like him. It's what I was getting at towards the end of the piece, but you've put it a little more bluntly! Could have save me some words!