Both are all-time great, Hall of Fame-calibre players–incredible to watch, especially together. But one was better. It was ….
When we compare athletes to one another, we often judge them using comparables, things like position played, when they played or played with a similar style. In the NBA, we talk about Magic v. Bird. In the NFL, the conversation for two decades has been about Brady v. Manning. In boxing, it’s about Ali v. Frazier. In tennis, is Federer better than Sampras? In the NHL, its Crosby or Ovechkin.
However, sometimes we get an outlier. In the NBA, it happens when we compare “big man” v. “little man.” Recently, that debate has been about Shaquille O’Neal v. Kobe Bryant. To make things spicer, a social media spat between those two caught the public’s attention.
Kobe said that if Shaq would have worked harder, then he (Kobe) would have won twelve rings. Shaq responded by explained it this way: if Kobe had passed the ball more, then they’d have won twelve titles.
There’s obviously no love lost between these superstars. Had they gotten along, they may very well have won twelve championships. However, they did great as it is–a 3-peat and dominating the league.
But make no mistake about it: Kobe was unhappy with Shaq. He voiced that opinion publicly and threatened to leave LA because of it. Bryant prevailed in this Game of Chicken. Shaq was shipped to Miami. Kobe became the Lakers’ alpha dog.
So who is better? Each had minuses and pluses.
Shaq, dominant in the paint, had trouble hitting free throws consistently. Kobe, a phenomenal ball-handler, often stayed in isolation too long, ending up making bad passes or putting up prayers. On the positive side, Shaq could demand double- and triple- teams, which left other players open for shots. He was a great passer, too. Kobe could create plays anywhere on the court, and he could drive by you, too, pulling up for a fadeaway or a step-back three.
On defense, Kobe was great, often taking on the opposition’s best player. Shaq defended multiple players in the zone, often blocking shot-after-shot.
If you’ve watched both play ball in their prime, then you know just how great these players were. Statistically, here’s how they compare.
| SHAQ | KOBE | |
| PPG | 23.7 | 25.0 |
| REB | 10.9 | 5.2 |
| AST | 2.5 | 4.7 |
| FG% | 58.2% | 44.7% |
| BLK | 2.3 | 0.5 |
| STL | 0.6 | 1.4 |
Overall, I believe Shaq was the better defender. I can remember him swatting balls into the stands and being a brick wall in the paint. Heaven help you if you got in Shaq’s way as he went up for a dunk!
Kobe’s numbers are well-rounded, too. But I think a lockdown defender should have been able to average more steals. What’s more, with all those double-teams, Kobe had opportunities to find open men and grab more assists.
Numbers help tell the story, but stats are not the whole story. If you want to know who’s truly better, then study the impact that each player had on the game. That’s the difference, I think.
As you can probably tell by now, I would take Shaq over Kobe … but not by much. The cherry on top for me was watching Shaq become an unstoppable force. Besides, Shaq never came up short in the playoffs, but Kobe sometimes did. Bryant’s emotions sometimes interfered with his game.
Bottom line: I’ve never seen anything like Shaq, and I’ve been watching the NBA for over 35 years.
Both are all-time greats, Hall of Fame players. They were incredible to watch, especially when they played together.
And who knows how many titles they would have won had they stuck together?
