The Shaquille O’Neal-Kobe Bryant era in L.A. will forever be one of the most dominant stretches in NBA history. The duo created a dynasty, leading the Lakers to three back to back NBA championships between 2000 and 2002. However, there was always the lingering question: who was the better player? Every person has their own answer, and perhaps that’s what led to them falling apart.
Advertisement
When Kobe first entered the league, Shaq was already an established superstar. For a brief period, Kobe operated in the big man’s shadow. The two also had very different approaches to the game — Kobe was serious, laser-focused, and obsessed with greatness. Shaq was more light-hearted, often relying on his natural dominance and charisma.
So, who was the bigger reason behind the Lakers’ success in the early 2000s? According to Gilbert Arenas, it was Shaq. But that’s not to say that he thinks less of Bryant, or the impact he had on the NBA. It was more about how good Shaq was during those years.
During one of Gilbert Arenas’ recent live streams, a fan commented, “Gil talks more bad on Kobe’s legacy.” Hearing that struck a nerve. For many, an ex-NBA star not honoring one of the game’s most influential and legendary players would be surprising, and Arenas didn’t let it slide. He addressed the comment head-on, insisting he has nothing but respect for the “Black Mamba”.
As for the Kobe-Shaq comparison, Arenas explained that it’s a fact that “Diesel” was the best player, not just on that team, but in the entire league, during that run. And in his view, Bryant was the second option. Arenas didn’t deny Kobe’s greatness; in fact, he acknowledged that Kobe quickly closed the gap during those years. But he argued that during the heart of the three-peat, Shaq was the guy.
Gil said that at the start of the 2000s, Shaq was the “best player in the world.” He claimed that if you asked any player from that era who faced the Lakers, they’d all point to Shaq as the primary threat. It was the big fella drawing the double-teams, not Kobe. “Everyone in the NBA those three years, if they played with Shaquille O’Neal, they would’ve been option two, they’d have been Robin. He was the best player in the NBA,” Arenas said.
Arenas’ comments aren’t a knock on Kobe’s legacy; they’re just a reflection of reality. Shaq was simply the most dominant player in the world at the time. Kobe, meanwhile, was rising fast. By 2001, he was already one of the most skilled players in the league. By 2002, he was arguably a top-five talent in the NBA. But in Arenas’ eyes, the offense still ran through Shaq. He even admitted that by the 2002–03 season, Kobe had become the better player, and had the Lakers won that year, Kobe would’ve been the team’s first option.
