After I submitted my Top 20 NBA Players list to Jerod on Monday night, I braced for the fallout. To my surprise, it wasn’t nearly as bad as I had predicted.
On the one hand, almost nobody objected to Kareem being #1. I did my list a little differently, pretending like I was a GM that was drafting a player for his entire career. I think most people understood that, and the argument of “20 years (16 quality) is better than 15 years (11 quality)” seemed to fly pretty well.
On the other hand, there’s the whole “Michael Jordan” thing.
To be fair, the responses I have gotten are probably 60/40 in favor of Jordan over Kobe. However, most of the people that agreed with me were nice enough to e-mail me personally to tell me so, whereas Jordan’s supporters were much more vocal in the comment section and on my twitter page.
This doesn’t surprise me for two reasons:
- It’s much more fun to voice disagreements in public. I can’t even remember how many comments I’ve posted on writers’ pages when I disagreed with them. On the flip side, it’s not that fun to take time out of your day to tell the writer, “Yo dude. I agree. Nice job.”
- People almost universally love Michael Jordan…even when they take it to creepy “girlfriend lying to herself about her cheating boyfriend” extremes. I mean really, I could tell you that Michael Jordan once shot Jud Buechler in the kneecap for not finishing a suicide at 100%, and you would tell yourself, “Awesome! Jordan was such a competitor!” Of course, Kobe rolls his eyes at a teammate, and the entire blogosphere blows up with “Kobe is a bad teammate” storylines. I mean really, look no further than “Basketball-reference.com’s” All-Time Fan Ratings. Jordan is #1, and Kobe is #201…right behind Kevin Willis.
Anyway, I wanted to take the time to dive into the Kobe vs. Jordan debate once more. Once again, the rules for this list are further detailed here, but remember: Longevity matters, Era matters, and Rings matter, but aren’t the ultimate trump cards.
The two ideas I want to expand further are as follows:
- Kobe Bryant’s peak will never ever be as good as Michael Jordan’s peak. But it’s not nearly as lopsided as people think. Because of this, Kobe’s longevity not only narrows the gap, but turns the balance in his favor.
- Championships, at their core, are team accomplishments. So it’s unfair to say that anybody is better than anyone else just because they have rings. Is Steve Kerr really better than Steve Nash? No. Thank you very much. I’ll be here, spewing out smart things, all night. I also believe, wholeheartedly, that Jordan’s teams were much more stacked compared to the competition than Kobe’s were.
On to point number one.
Peak vs Longevity
Quickly, if you had to choose one of the following two players to build your team around, who would it be (as much as you may want to, you aren’t allowed to say “Neither”): Tracy McGrady or Vince Carter?
Try to forget, for just a few minutes, that both players aren’t winners. You really wouldn’t build around either of them…but if you had to, who would you take?Any true basketball fan knows that T-Mac’s peak was simply higher than Vincanity’s. At one point, he was the best pure scorer in the league, an underrated passer, and simply unstoppable at times – averaging 33 and 28 PPG as a 23- and 24-year-old. He made two All-NBA First Teams, three Second Teams, and had a 4-year-peak of 28-8-5.
Vince, on the other hand, peaked at 26 and 28 PPG as a 24- and 25-year-old. He only made one All-NBA Second Team and one Third Team while averaging 26-6-4 over three seasons.
At first glance, the average guy would take T-Mac. But then you remember that out of MacGrady’s fourteen seasons, only seven of them were quality (It’s amazing when you realize that T-Mac is only 31 right now, when it seems like he’s been washed up for 5 years). Carter, on the other hand, had ten straight seasons of 20+ PPG, and is still a viable 15 PPG player on a contender thirteen years into his career.
Basically, T-Mac’s prime needs to have been considerably better than Vince’s prime in order to take a seven-year career over one that’s twice as long. In my opinion, most GM’s would sacrifice two points, two rebounds, and one assist in order to get six additional quality years.
This is my first argument for Kobe over Jordan.
Michael Jordan played for fifteen years, but he broke his foot in 1985-86 and only started seven games (Yes, Jordan fans, I understand this was flukey…and doesn’t often happen…but it did happen. Sure, Jordan was robbed of a season unfairly…but he was still robbed. End of story). He also missed the entire 1993-94 season during his baseball hiatus, and he only played seventeen games in 1994-95. There go two more years. Finally, his last two years in Washington were awesome years for a 38- and 39-year-old…but not really Jordan-esque, and definitely not “Top 100 Players Ever” types of years.
Meanwhile, Kobe just finished his fifteenth year as well. In his first two years, as an 18- and 19-year-old playing behind All-Star Eddie Jones, The Mamba only started seven games total. It would be hard (to say the least) to call those years “quality” years. However, he has been at least a 20 PPG scorer and started all but five games since he was twenty years old.
That gives us thirteen years of High Quality Kobe Bryant compared to just eleven for Michael Jordan. (This is also assuming that Kobe Bryant is done right now. I don’t think he’s finished, but I think we could all agree that his career is winding to a close. I think an incredibly conservative assessment would be that Kobe has one more good year, and then two or three more that are similar to Jordan on the Wizards. Whatever. I will give you Jordan fans the benefit of the doubt…let’s just pretend that Kobe is completely washed up now.)
Now, as a GM, Jordan’s eleven years need to be much better than Kobe’s thirteen years in order to draft Air ahead of the Mamba. So let’s take a look at their actual peaks. Here are their four best years from a statistical standpoint.
Kobe Bryant:
- ‘02-03: 30-7-6; Percentages of 45-38-84; 1st Team All-NBA, 1st Team All-NBA Defense.
- ’05-06: 35-5-5; Percentages of 45-35-85; 1st Team All-NBA, 1st Team All-NBA Defense.
- ’06-07: 32-6-6; Percentages of 46-34-87; 1st Team All-NBA, 1st Team All-NBA Defense.
- ’07-08: 28-6-5; Percentages of 46-36-84; 1st Team All-NBA, 1st Team All-NBA Defense.
Michael Jordan:
- ’86-87: 37-6-6; Percentages of 48-18-86; 1st Team All-NBA.
- ’87-88: 35-6-6; Percentages of 54-13-84; 1st Team All-NBA, 1st Team All-NBA Defense.
- ’88-89: 33-8-8; Percentages of 54-28-85; 1st Team All-NBA, 1st Team All-NBA Defense.
- ’89-90: 34-7-6; Percentages of 53-38-85; 1st Team All-NBA, 1st Team All-NBA Defense.
Interestingly enough, none of those years were Championship Years for either. I guess that shows that even two of the greatest players of all time need a good team to win titles (more on this in a second).
But look at those stats again. Jordan averaged 3.5 more points, 0.75 more rebounds, and 1 more assist a game. He shot much better from the field, but much worse from three-point range (Don’t be fooled by his ’89-90 percentage…he more or less realized he couldn’t shoot threes and only made 1.1 a game. He ended up making 581 in fifteen seasons compared to Kobe’s 1418). They were both elected to every possible All-NBA team, and Kobe made one more Defensive 1st Team than Jordan.
Are Jordan’s statistics better? Yes. Is he “leaps and bounds” better? Absolutely not. As a GM, would you take his eleven years over Kobe’s thirteen (minimum)? I’m not sure yet. But for those of you who came to this article with a strong Jordan bias, you need to be honest: it’s much closer than you thought it would be.
Now, maybe you are thinking, “Those were just four random years! Jordan was awesome for all eleven of those seasons!” Ok, let’s look at each player’s best eleven seasons.
Kobe:
- 27-6-5;
- Percentages of 46-34-84;
- Nine All-NBA First Teams, One Second Team, One Third Team;
- Nine First Teams All-NBA Defense, Two Second Teams All-NBA Defense
Jordan:
- 32-6-5;
- Percentages of 51-33-84;
- Ten All-NBA First Teams, One Second Team;
- Nine First Teams All-NBA Defense
This probably surprises you even more. It’s almost eerie how similar the two are. Jordan averaged five more points and shot better from the field, but Kobe made more Defensive teams and made over 750 more threes than His Airness. Nearly every other statistical category is equal.
Also of note, is that I don’t really think era affects these numbers unfairly in either direction. On the one hand, there may have been three guys in the entire league that were as athletic as Michael Jordan when he played, while today there are two guys on every team that are as big, strong, and athletic as he was (unfair advantage for Jordan). On the other hand, they were allowed to handcheck, push, grab, and practically punch people in the face when Jordan played (unfair advantage for Kobe).
Jordan supporters love to say things like, “Jordan would average 45 points a game if he played today with the way the rules are.” Kobe supporters counter with arguments like “Yeah, and Kobe would absolutely love to be guarded by guys like Jeff Hornacek in back-to-back NBA Finals!”
To me, the eras mostly cancel each other out, and besides, we could never really know…so let’s just take the stats for what they are worth.
Here is my point: Kobe Bryant was never ever as good as Michael Jordan at their respective peaks. But it was very close. And Kobe’s longevity could absolutely end up making his career better than Michael Jordan’s.
But you might still be on the fence. Those of you who disagree with me probably fall into one of three camps.
- “Screw you, Twitch. I’d still take eleven years of the best guy ever over thirteen years of Kobe Bryant.”
- “Jordan still has six rings, compared to Kobe’s five.”
- “Kobe played with Shaq! He wasn’t the best player on three of those championship teams! Kobe really only has two rings. It’s not even close!”
To those of you in that first group, I will never change your mind, and that’s fine. Seriously. It’s a hard call for me as well, because the fact is, even though Jordan’s eleven weren’t a lot better, they were still better. If you choose to rank Jordan ahead of Kobe because of those transcendent eleven years, that’s fine with me – so long as you at least admit that the distance between MJ and Kobe is far smaller than you originally realized.
But to everyone in those final two groups, I’d like to give you the second reason why I believe Kobe is better than Jordan – and that’s the fact that Michael Jordan, simply, played against inferior competition.
Comparing the Competition
Now don’t get all crazy on me. I don’t mean to say that the players in the 90s were way worse than the players of the 2000s. In fact, after a ton of research, I believe that the players are pretty equal.
From 1991 to 1998, Magic (#4), Hakeem (#11), Shaq (#12), Malone (#18), Barkley (#19), Isiah (#23), Stockton (#25), Robinson (#29), Ewing (#40), Payton (#41), and Clyde (#44) ran things along with Jordan and Pippen. That’s a total of thirteen of the top 50 players ever according to Bill Simmons’ Book of Basketball). Jordan and Pippen teamed up to beat nine of them in the Playoffs.
Since 2000, Duncan (#7), Kobe (#8), Shaq (#12), LeBron (#20), Garnett (#22), Wade (#28), Robinson (#29), Nash (#36), Iverson (#37), Dirk Nowitzki (#39), Payton (#41), Kidd (#43), and Pierce (#47) have run the show. Not surprisingly, that’s another thirteen of the top 50 players (And this is with guys like Dwight Howard, Chris Paul, Carmelo Anthony, and Kevin Durant not included…four guys that could easily be in the top 50 one day). Kobe has beaten eight of them in the Playoffs (and all four of the players that were not included yet).
No, the players have largely remained just as good, but the point I want to make is this: There have been five teams (by my count) since 1980 that were “stacked.” By stacked, I mean they had at least two of the top 24 or three of the top 35 players ever.
- The 1980s LA Lakers – Kareem (#2) and Magic (#4)…(Worthy was also #50).
- The 1981 Philadelphia 76ers – Moses (#13) and Dr. J (#16)
- The 1986 Boston Celtics – Bird (#5), Walton (#27), McHale (#35)…(DJ was also #54 and Parish was #59).
- The 1990s Chicago Bulls – Jordan (#1) and Pippen (#24)
- The 2000 Los Angeles Lakers – Kobe (#8) and Shaq (#12)
Whenever someone makes the claim that Kobe “unfairly coasted on Shaq’s coattails for his first three rings,” they are plainly forgetting two things.
Comparing the Co-Pilots
First, Jordan’s teams were just as stacked if not more so than Kobe’s.
If you read my original top 20, you saw that I believe that Scottie Pippen is severely underrated historically. But even if you only believe he was the 24th best player ever (like Bill Simmons says), that means that he was the second best player on the floor in all but six series’ during the Bulls’ Championship Reign. Magic, Isiah, and Barkley in ’91, Barkley in ’93, and the Mailman in ’97 and ’98 were the only players on the floor that were as good as the Bulls’ second best player. If you agree with me and Pistons’ coach Chuck Daly that Pippen was the second best guard on the Dream Team and in the 90s, that means that the only time in Bulls’ six championship seasons that they didn’t have the two best players on the floor was in the 1991 NBA Finals against Magic and the Lakers – which, coincidentally, ended up changing when Pippen moved over to guard Magic in Game 2.
Here are the facts: Jordan never won a playoff series without Pippen. During their Championship reign, the Bulls almost never played a series where they didn’t have the two best players. Jordan won all six of his rings this way.
Second, to say that Kobe coasted on Shaq’s coattails is disingenuous to what Kobe brought to the table.
It’s easy to forget now, but the Lakers could not go to Shaq in crunch time of games because he was such an egregious foul shooter. Kobe haters always seem to “forget” that as a 21-year-old, he had three straight 30-point efforts in an incredibly close first round matchup against the Kings and single-handedly beat the Pacers in a series-changing game three that went to overtime. They gloss over his 2001 campaign where he posted a 48-point, 16-rebound effort against Sacramento and then a 45-point, 10-rebound effort against San Antonio the next game. Yes, Shaq won all three MVPs, but if you go back and watch the games, or just look at the stats…you wwill be surprised.
The Lakers weren’t winning anything without Kobe. Not even close.
But even if you feel that Shaq was a better teammate than Pippen was, what Kobe accomplished from 2008-2010 with Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom as his next best players is far greater than any title that Jordan won.
In 2008, the Lakers beat Denver (Carmelo), Utah (Williams and Boozer), and San Antonio (Duncan, Ginobili, and Parker) before losing to Boston (Garnett and Pierce). The Lakers never had the two best players in any of those series’ like Jordan often had. The next year, against Utah, Houston, Denver, and Orlando, the Lakers only had the two best players on the floor in one series – Houston – and this was only after Yao Ming broke his foot. 2010 was a similar story. OKC (Durant), Utah (Williams), Phoenix (Amare’ and Nash), and Boston (Rondo and Pierce) each had one of the two best players on the floor. For Kobe to make it to three straight Finals and win two of them was far more difficult than Jordan and Pippen beating up on the likes of Reggie Miller and Rik Smits, or Karl Malone and John Stockton.
Look, you don’t have to like Kobe. But just ask yourself this: who would it be harder to win a championship with? Scottie Pippen, the 24th best player of all time, and a guy that Chuck Daly said was the second best player of his entire era? Or Pau Gasol, an All-Star big man whose game is based on finesse and who is not in Simmons’ Top 96 Players at all?
It’s close. It’s very close. At the end of the day, you would be thrilled to have either Kobe or Jordan on your team.
But in my opinion, I would take Kobe’s 13 years (and counting) of very great play over Jordan’s 11 years of very very great play.
In my opinion, I think that Kobe accomplished more with less than Jordan ever did.
That’s why, on my list, it reads Kobe first, then Jordan.
Loading ...
About Jon Washburn
btw… i cant wait for about 10 years when Phil Jackson is bored and needs some attention and some vegas money and he writes his first book…. "Who really was the best player – Kobe or Jordan" — its going to sell like crazy…
Thank you for defining your measurement parameters, i.e. a GM trying to build a team, not a fan watching, or a marketing manager trying to sell the product.
As someone who has been around long enough to have seen Wilt play and followed Kareem since he enrolled at UCLA, I have seen a lot of spectacular basketball. We all have favorites, but to simply define a 'best of all time' is simply impossible. It is interesting that you place Kareem #1 and yet there is no further mention of him. The article, of course, is not about him and we are currently so enamored of ESPN highlights that he often seems to be a forgotten player in the NBA.
Thanks again for being so specific.
Also, the McGrady/Carter argument I think was a little flawed for this particular article. People already have preconceived opinions about those players (McGrady…always injured…cant make it out of the 1st round…13 points in 33 seconds)..(Carter…best dunker ever…over the 7 footer..awesome…overrated tho as a player). Comparing Kobe and Jordan to them might make a point but shouldnt determine an argument. The Barry Sanders proposition by KR was good I thought because many regard him (or even Jim Brown) as the greatest ever even tho they had shorter careers….its football so the comparison is not quite the same. Either way it gets away from Kobe and Jordan. But Twitch…are you willing to admit Jordan is the best player ever? throwing out the GM argument?
The talent level in the 90's is better than when the Lakers won in 2000-2002. Wade, Lebron and Anthony weren't even in the league yet.
I'm definitely in the first camp of people. Jordan would have scored 40+ points a game if he were playing under today's rules.
Also…if I was a coach. I would be much more afraid of Jordan than Kobe. He was bigger and meaner and had a way better post game. He wasn't a head case that would just start chucking shots in the 4th quarter and ruin winnable games and he never tried to be traded either.
one reason why i think that post is flawed in terms of kobe winning with less talent because mj won titles on teams with no dominate big man or decent pg while the pg argument can sway either way because of the triangle offense that really didn't need a real pg all teams who have won titles have won them with dominant big men or at least very decent big men Hakeem,Shaq,Duncan,KG The Wallace boys,Gasol&Bynum,Shaq&Morning,Dirk&Chandler,Kareem,Parish&Mchale,Lambeer&Mahorn Mike never really played with really good big men I mean Grant was ok Rodman was there best big man and he was jordans height(6'6) A Center is the anchor of any teams defense and if u have a great defensive Center that greatens your chances of winning and if u have a great offensive and defensive center well your going to win MJs most talented cast was in 96 and they still didnt have a center or pg thats just my thought
Kobe is my favorite player. I disagree.
^Jordon is #1 all time.
I agree with your conclusion, any GM would be more than satisfied with either player. Since both are players a GM could build a franchise around, in any era.
Yes the 96-98 bulls were a better team than the 08-10 lakers but thats because those bulls played together better as a team than the 08-10 lakers played together…… thats not to say the bulls individual talent was better …….here is a list of the best 10 players from the 96-98 bulls and the best 10 from the 08-10 lakers (excluding mj and kobe)
bulls: lakers:
scottie pau
rodman artest
luc longley andrew bynum
ron harper derek fisher
steve kerr lamar odom
toni kukoc trevor ariza
jason cafey shanon brown
randy brown jordan farmar
Bill Wenington Josh Powell
Jud Buchler Sasha vujacic
if anything i think the lakers have the edge in a better / younger bench and a far better center in bynum…..but the pippen factor makes the playing field dead even…….since pippen is the best second best player on a team ever!!!!!/no one else on the lakers is better than him except for kobe of course……
as for stats…jordan career shoting % is at 49% kobes career % is no where near it …….kobe has the better three hands down but jordan made his career inside the arc and in the paint (this explains why his shooting % is higher then kobes)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_Efficiency_Ra… —> link to a player efficiency formula created by john hollinger calculation stats including defensive stats to rate players.
What i find most unfair and mildly annoying is your short rant about pippen and jordan beating on inferior competition. Reggie, Jalen rose, mark jackson, and rick smits, took em to 7 games in 98, you forget to mention tim hardaway, alonzo morning, the then young and up and coming washington bullets with chris webber juan howard and rod strickland (yea they failed to reach their potential hmmmm nuggets never really reached their potential with melo did they), new york knicks with ewing, alan houston, starks, oakley, orlando with shaq and anfarnee or how about payton and kemp mixed with detlef schrempf……john stockton and karl malone were future hall of famers then that beat hakeem barkley drexler to get to the 98 finals….
(all aforementioned teams were opponents bulls faced in the playoffs 96-98 except for the rockets)
let me ask you a question, 10 years from now do you think people are going to remember paul pierce, steve nash, carmelo anthony, especially if they dont win multiple titles???? I can guarantee they'll be saying the same thing you are ……its the classic latest is the greatest trap………
but it doesn't matter because 10 years from now people will still be searching for the next mj!!!!
Every one wants to say these era of players are better because there bigger faster stronger but no has yet to say better basketball players which if u have seen a lot of basketball is not the case. Lack of fundamentals is one because most of the star players who play now came right out of high school or spent 1 year in college and don't have a clue on how to properly play basketball no mid range game. no post up game, NO DEFENSE and its proven time after time when players go overseas and get banged with the exception of the last summer Olympics ,USA had to assemble 3 or four "DREAM TEAMS" before they could win. Number 2 post 99 lockout the NBA had to get back on its feet because they were losing money so just like baseball with the homerun chase with a juiced up Sammy and Mark which led to the saving of baseball the NBA had to make the league an offensive friendly league with the defensive 3second rule and the no hand checking rule which inflated scoring which led to the saving of basketball. People forget that MJ at the age of forty when he played for the wizards averaged over 20pts a game and even scored fifty points in this era against the same players. To end my point the league today is entertaining at best but is watered down and mike in his prime would bust all these dudes down with no problem
While the argument is alright as far as it goes it unfortunately overlooks that which overrides all others in my humble opinion. For all the deserved heat LeBron is getting for his meltdown and disappearance against Dallas, our collective historical amnesia seems to have misplaced the file on the 2004 finals in which, after a stellar Game 1, Kobe pulled about the exact same vanishing act for the rest of the series. In spite of their name intangibles are very real and do matter a great deal, even to a number-crunching GM. The fact that no basketball fan on earth could ever imagine MJ doing what Kobe did against the Blazers in '00, the Spurs in '03, the aforementioned series with the Pistons, the '06 series with Phoenix and of course, 6 for 24 in game 7 of the '10 finals, makes all the difference on earth to me. It's not that Jordan didn't miss game winners, or have off nights for that matter. Of course he showed his human side from time to time. But the fact that Kobe delivered more than his fair share of absolute clunkers (even in series LA won) while Jordan was dropping 63 against probably the greatest team of all-time means I'm building my franchise around His Airness. He may not give me as many years, but I can always count on him to show up for each series. Like it or not Kobe fans, he's let you down about a dozen times more than MJ ever let his down.
PS: A word on the three point shooting…Jordan came of age in an era when, well, guys were leading the league at 33%. No joke, look it up. The three point shot just wasn't really an integral part of the pro game until the latter stages of MJ's Bulls run. Had he come of age in an era when contenders actually wanted their guards tossing up treys I would bet a month's rent he would have been a much better three point shooter.
In order to compare the stats, you have to think about the change in hand checking fouls. In the 90's the fouls were much more laid back, but now you can get a foul for touching a player taking a lay-up. For this reason, players can get to the hoop with ease, example: Kobe. Now, players go to the free throw line much more often, and Kobe is one of those players. So for Jordan to get 30 points a game then, would be 40 or 50 now. If Kobe peaked in the 90s, he wouldn't get nearly as many points as Jordan, because he would face tougher defense. He also would not get so many fouls, and wouldn't go to the free throw line as often as he does now. Even though Jordan had more free attempts in his "peak". So even with the rule difference, i'd take Jordan.
I'm pretty sure Jordan never let a team sweep him in an NBA playoff series after wining 2 championships, maybe cause he went out on top, or just because he's a beast you can choose. Not to mention the Lackers' embarrassing lose to Dallas totally ruined Kobe's second three peat. The fact of the matter is Joran did it twice, Kobe did it once, and got destroyed the year which would've been his second time.
I disagree, Kobe is a great player but Michael is better. Considering the man did take 2 years off to go play baseball, then came back and dominated again. Oh yeah, you can't compare Kobe's sidekick during those years (Shaq) to Michael's (Scottie), Scottie couldn't compete at a playoff level with MJ. The reason Scottie is where he is today is because of Michael. Shaq left, went to Miami, still won a championship. He was in Boston for theirs (championship). Shaq did it for other teams, Scottie didn't. Michael made that team. half his starters would've been considered bench players on some of the other teams. Without Kobe, the lakers would still win games, not many, but definitely more than the Cavaliers without James. Jordan had the smarts for the game which took Kobe years to learn. Jordan knew when to pass it and when to take the shot.
You make a good argument but it is inconsistent. You mentioned that championships is about the team (5 starters and the bench) but then you spend the majority of the article debating how michael and scottie were the best two players on the floor during their championship runs. The Bull's entire team was nowhere close to either of Kobe's championship teams and you're lying to yourself if you think so. The Bulls are one of the only teams in NBA history to win without a dominant big man (no offense Luc Longely and Bill Wennington). Eras being equaled out (to your point), Michael's accomplishments on an inferior team compared to Kobe's championship teams are what truly distinguish him from Kobe.
Good article though, enjoyed it.
What a dumbass saying Shaq was Kobe's sidekick.
Shaq's production (PER) was far greater then Kobe's every year of the 3peat and was light years greater in 00
he also led the team in WShares 2/3 years and was tied with Kobe in 01.
Shaq's 10 best years are better then Kobe's best year and you think Kobe should be ranked 8th all time and Shaq 12th? Shaq is a legimate top 5 GOAT while Kobe is at best 9-15.
What an idiotic biased article.
I am smh at this ridiculous comparison.. Finals MVP's, Overall league MVP's decide who the real gamer is? Actually Shaq has more finals MVP's than Kobe… Hmmmmmmmmm
i agree.
I guess it depends on how you’re building your list. If you’re ranking based on career value, and not based on the traditional “greatest of all time,” then yes I could agree. I find that a weird way to rank players though, unless you’re a draft nut. Still, gotta give it up for having creativity..sometimes it helps to look at things differently.
I do think you’re analysis on championship wins is a bit flawed though. Yes championships are a team effort, but every team needs a leader. You’ve been around basketball long enough to know that a team could be going nowhere until they get that one special player who turns the whole thing around. Yes, teams win championships, but it takes a leader to get them there. Michael Jordan led his team to what, 6 of them? And they won…that is a very hard figure to ignore. It’d be hard to imagine the Bulls winning 6 like that without Michael Jordan, he paved the way for them. Its just like how Kobe led his team to championships..without either player those championships were not happening.
With that being said, more weight should be added to championships, because that really shows a player’s value: his ability to lead his team to championships, and win his team championships. Every team needs a key player, without one they inevitably fall short. Always. This fact of team sports is quite invariable. More than anything, teams need a leader that gives them hope, brings out the best in them, and inspires them. They also need a leader who can lead them to victory. Jordan did all of that. Kobe did all of that, though not as well. Its food for thought.
I am not choosing one over the other, but I will point out a huge flaw Jordan supporters always claim – hand checking – which I will tie into this part of the article which is still a little flawed in its thinking. ”Also of note, is that I don’t really think era affects these numbers unfairly in either direction. On the one hand, there may have been three guys in the entire league that were as athletic as Michael Jordan when he played, while today there are two guys on every team that are as big, strong, and athletic as he was (unfair advantage for Jordan). On the other hand, they were allowed to handcheck, push, grab, and practically punch people in the face when Jordan played (unfair advantage for Kobe).” Yes, very true. Kobe would be in the top most athletic in that era, yet today he ain’t cracking the top 40 most athletic if he was in his prime. MJ may be in the top 20 today of most athletic if he were in his prime, but would not be miles ahead of the top 60 athletic guys as he was in his day. The point is scoring is much harder today and is not completely offset by ‘handchecking.” To prove my point: During Jordan’s prime the league averaged over an additional 10 points per game than it does today, which really should translate to Kobe having a higher FG% and a higher PPG because it was easier to score. All the talk about how rough it was defensively during Jordan’s era isn’t a good argument (you know…the refs let them play because things like handchecking were legal) because the the league actually averaged slightly more foul calls per game than it today (so if anything the refs let them play without a whistle more today). And no the league does not shoot worse today and you can look at FT% comparatively over seasons and it’s better in Kobe’s era, meaning more points were scored in Jordan’s era because the defense was more inferior to the offense respectively than it is today. So yeah, that is NOT a wash. That is advantageous to Jordan’s number as whole. I spoke my peace. Why has this never been discussed by supposed NBA gurus in regards to Jordan v Kobe is beyond me. As far as I’m concerned, championships mean little. Barkley won 0. Hakeem only won 2. Robert Horry won 7. Horry, right? Haha… Laughable, right? If Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant were on the Charlotte Bobcats for their whole career they would have never ever won a championship, which really doesn’t make them any less good.. That is why the championship argument is generally a lousy one.
L. O. L Kobe himself would choose Jordan if he could. Let it go. Not only was Kobe not on Jordan’s level, he wasn’t really close. You can massage all the numbers, distort all the facts, cloud all the context and minimize his accomplishments but it doesn’t change the fact that Jordan was on another level than Kobe.
You’ll see exactly what I mean when some young fans — who is only going to catch the last few years of Kobe’s career — start writing essays (with proof!) about how much better Durant is.
I will say this about your numbers comparison. Jordan leads Kobe in every category. For now, let’s not talk about how the NBA took away aggressive defense that led to an outburst in perimeter scoring which helped Kobe… Let’s just look at the numbers at face value. What does Kobe do best? Score, right? Jordan scored more and he scored more efficiently. Jordan also grabbed more rebounds, made more assists, got more steals, more blocks and made fewer turnovers.
Do you know how complete that domination is? Think about it…he did what Kobe does best better than Kobe did while at the same time did everything else better, too. That’s like saying Jordan juggled eight balls better than Kobe juggles two. And you’re saying 3.5 points difference isn’t that much??? How about 3.5 more points + x more rebs + y more assists + a more steals + b more blocks with c less turnovers. Please.
Anytime you can choose the best of the best, you do it. You would be a fool to pick Kobe over Jordan under any circumstances considering that Kobe is a cheap copy of the original. No disrespect cause Kobe’s a great player…but if you have a chance to get the absolute best, you do it and don’t rationalize against it.
I enjoyed reading the article and thought that your viewpoint as a GM was a very unique way of looking at the argument. I do present to you a question in the context of your viewpoint . As a GM I can understand wanting to draft someone with thirteen years of high quality performance compared to an eleven year performance. However as a GM, it’s not just enough to draft players that will give you great quality play. As a GM wouldn’t you want to your draft great players in order to win your team as many championships as possible? Jordan has won 6 championships in his 11 years of quality play. Kobe has given thirteen years of high quality play but he would have only won your team 5 championships. If you are a GM for a team and had to make the decision today between the two, wouldn’t the better choice be Jordan instead of Kobe?
You cant compare Kobe and MJ yet because Kobe isnt even close to being done!!!!!!!