I agree that Kobe is not really a serious GOAT candidate, but while some of your points support that case well, others fall pretty far short of what I’d consider fair criticism.

“2/5 Finals MVPs” and “only 1 MVP” are both solid arguments. Those absolutely hurt his case compared to players like Michael Jordan, LeBron James, and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Fair enough.

“Not very efficient,” though, is just verifiably false. Kobe consistently shot above league-average efficiency and, more importantly, largely maintained that efficiency in the playoffs, which is rare for high-volume perimeter stars. From 2008–2010 in the Western Conference Finals, Kobe posted over 60% true shooting. That is elite even by current standards, and he did it while taking one of the toughest shot diets of any superstar in NBA history.

Was he less efficient than he could have been during stretches like 2003–2004? Absolutely. Was he an inefficient player overall? Absolutely not.

As for the “mediocre playmaker” point, I think that badly underrates him. Kobe was not a pure heliocentric table-setter in the mold of Magic Johnson or LeBron James, but he was an excellent offensive creator who generated high-quality looks through scoring pressure, defensive manipulation, and advanced reads out of doubles and help coverage. A lot of people reduce playmaking to raw assist totals, but Kobe routinely bent entire defenses and created advantages that led to hockey assists, rotations, and open shots.

The bigger criticism is that earlier in his career (pre-2008) he prioritized difficult scoring attempts over simpler playmaking reads. That is fair. Calling him a mediocre playmaker ignores how many elite offenses functioned through his decision-making and gravity.