You think either the 2003 Spurs or 2011 Mavericks had more talent? You high? They were significantly better teams sure, but undoubtedly less talent.
The 08 Celtics and Lakers were about even I'd say. Both were loaded.
You are beyond any kind of level of objectivity when it comes to discussing Kobe.
How does one team having 3 HOF players in an around their prime equal the same as one team having one HOF player, one all star, and a bunch of role players.
Kobe doesn't lose to lower seeds unless, as Mamba and everyone else has noticed, it happens when he's trying to make the finals 4 times in a row and then he loses to the eventual champion. Kobe Lakers are 5-1 against the Spurs...how are you even debating this?
Kobe, more than any other person in his generation, has gotten the job done when he was given the talent to do it. Lebron hasn't, Shaq missed tons of opportunities despite playing with HOF caliber players all his career, Timmy from 98-2008 either won the chip, or lost to LA essentially. (He also lost to Mavs once)
Kobe is, by far, the best of his generation at getting the job done when his team is labeled a possible contender, no one even comes close.
Basic stat, since you love
FIFTY so much.
Kobe has been the starter of a team that has won 50 games
9 times in his career
He's made the finals
7 of those 9 times
He's
won 5 chips and lost to the eventual champion
4 times (twice in the finals, twice in a 4th consecutive finals attempt where he was the best player on his team in the series and everyone else disappeared)
Edit: Pre 2009 you could argue for Timmy. But Since 2009...Timmy has only made it out of the first round once in the last 3 playoff attempts while Kobe's been winning rings. And if you talk about the talent level of the Spurs since 2009...you have to factor in the fact that Timmy won two chips in 05 and 07 when Kobe had MUCH worse talent than Timmy has EVER played with