No matter what Kobe does, Jordan will always be above him.
He can't get there. He just is not "it".
Lebron still has a shot.
He can't get there. He just is not "it".
Lebron still has a shot.
Kobe Bryant vs. Michael Jordan
11,747 Views |
133 Replies |
Last: 9 yr ago by Adam87inSA
Lebron actually seems to be an interesting argument in this one. It's interesting to see all the talk about Kobe, when he's not even being voted as the league's best player for two years running. In seasons where Jordan wasn't a Wizard and was actually in the league for a full year, Jordan only once went two years without being the league MVP (both went to Magic). That Kobe isn't even clearly the best player in the league right now would be single biggest indictment on Kobe's competition with Jordan to me. As has been provided, the statistics are more than adequate to back it up as well though.
Jordan only won a single MVP award in the 1980's. Not sure where you are getting that stat. He was drafted in 1984, won his first in 1988. The next one was in 1991.
Hard to believe LeBron is only three away from Jordan's final total as it stands right now. But then again Nash has as many as Shaq and Kobe combined so take it for what's it's worth: a regular season award.
[This message has been edited by Look Out Below (edited 6/22/2010 5:00p).]
Hard to believe LeBron is only three away from Jordan's final total as it stands right now. But then again Nash has as many as Shaq and Kobe combined so take it for what's it's worth: a regular season award.
[This message has been edited by Look Out Below (edited 6/22/2010 5:00p).]
http://espn.go.com/sportscentury/features/00016048.html
Jordan is an icon.
http://www.nba.com/jordan/jordan_icon_thiel.html
When someone has a legitimate argument that Kobe can be compared to Ruth, DiMaggio, Ali, etc., then maybe we can talk about this.
Jordan is an icon.
http://www.nba.com/jordan/jordan_icon_thiel.html
When someone has a legitimate argument that Kobe can be compared to Ruth, DiMaggio, Ali, etc., then maybe we can talk about this.
quote:
It is foolish to say that there will never be another like him. Who imagined the first one? But he will be what all those who follow him are measured against -- the standard bearer for the sports world, and worlds beyond.
Whenever this conversation comes up with my friends, I break it down like this. In my opinion, the only people who can lay claim to the title "best player in the history of the NBA" are Jordan and Wilt. Not only were they both dominant on the court, but they also culturally and/or fundamentally changed the game of basketball. The multiple rule changes for Wilt and the shift to the forefront of sports for Jordan puts them above everyone else. I don't care how talented some people are or how many championships they have, if they can't do something along those levels then there is no reason to bring them up in the conversation.
Well said Irish!
I think everyone seems to just be remembering that Jordan stood out above the rest in his day rather than comparing how Jordan would do against Kobe. It's really two different eras. Back then, there were superstars and a bunch of scrubs, with a few in between. There really isn't any scrubs in the league any more. Jordan was considered one of the greatest physical specimans of all time the way he could "fly" through the air. Now, there's several comparable players in the league.
I would say that if the comparison was strictly who would beat who in a game of one on one if they were both in their prime, I might give the nod to Kobe. He's a bit taller, longer, and is more of a pure shooter that Jordan. Jordan was probably quicker and had a little more body control in the air.
But, what really matter is team ball and leading other players, so the MVP goes to Jordan without question. Kobe kind of is at a disadvantage though, because he had to "wait his turn" for it to be his team. Jordan was the best player right away.
I would say that if the comparison was strictly who would beat who in a game of one on one if they were both in their prime, I might give the nod to Kobe. He's a bit taller, longer, and is more of a pure shooter that Jordan. Jordan was probably quicker and had a little more body control in the air.
But, what really matter is team ball and leading other players, so the MVP goes to Jordan without question. Kobe kind of is at a disadvantage though, because he had to "wait his turn" for it to be his team. Jordan was the best player right away.
quote:
Back then, there were superstars and a bunch of scrubs, with a few in between. There really isn't any scrubs in the league any more. Jordan was considered one of the greatest physical specimans of all time the way he could "fly" through the air. Now, there's several comparable players in the league.
A bunch of scrubs???? The NBA was at it's best in the 80's and 90's. Jordan was a speciman....but there were many that had similar athletic ability before, during and after. Look up Charles Barkley in his prime, or the human highlight, or Clyde...all of them were freaks of nature. Big men were much better in the early 90's. Jordan dunked on all of them.
Also, Jordan played against Kobe several times. The link is from the 01-02 season..kobe's physical prime, Jordan is way past his prime and held his own. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC2d3nEO0Lk
Physically, Kobe may be .5-1" taller, but I would bet that MJ's wingspan, reach were equal or better. MJ's hands are significantly bigger than Kobe's. I also don't think Kobe had the explosion Jordan did. Kobe is a better shooter but stats don't really show that because he takes so many bad shots.
Jordan was a significantly better defender, one of the best ever. Let me know if Kobe can do this when he gets to that age.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZfTFWvghgM&feature=related
[This message has been edited by BBDP (edited 7/2/2010 3:33p).]
Solid post. Jordan's vertical was supposedly 48 while Kobe's was 38 and Jordan's longer arms made their standing reach identical. Completely agree on the shooting, especially the further from the basket you go.
I agree big men -- centers -- were better in 90's but there have been a lot of solid forwards and guards in the league this decade too. Kobe had to pretty much defend the other team's best 1-2-3 men for a large chunk this decade while Pippen kept MJ from guarding any 3's so that is slightly apples and oranges, but I don't dispute Jordan was a better defender. I still would rather have Kobe with the ball and one shot left due to his success on degree of difficulty from distance though.
I agree big men -- centers -- were better in 90's but there have been a lot of solid forwards and guards in the league this decade too. Kobe had to pretty much defend the other team's best 1-2-3 men for a large chunk this decade while Pippen kept MJ from guarding any 3's so that is slightly apples and oranges, but I don't dispute Jordan was a better defender. I still would rather have Kobe with the ball and one shot left due to his success on degree of difficulty from distance though.
I doubt there will ever be another MJ in my
lifetime. The fact that there's even a debate over this shows how great of a player Kobe is. I'm jealous of those who were old enough to enjoy MJ in his prime.
lifetime. The fact that there's even a debate over this shows how great of a player Kobe is. I'm jealous of those who were old enough to enjoy MJ in his prime.
Sorry, but you are an idiot if you'd rather have the ball in Kobe's hands over MJ with 1 shot left.
Not really. Kobe passed Jordan in game-winning shots two years ago. Kobe takes and hits more crazy-ass shots than Jordan ever did. That is a fact. If you don't believe it, you're either too young to remember or absence is making the heart grow fonder. That said, I do agree Jordan is still the better overall player, but it's not as big a disparity the Jordan lovers think.
quote:
NO ONE...And I mean NO ONE should EVER com par kobe Bryant to my dad an say that he is anywhere near close to my dad He's jagging this game
Couldn't have said it better myself. Not quite sure what "jagging" is though.
quote:
The fact that there's even a debate over this shows how great of a player Kobe is.
Disagree. Just shows how ADD our society has become.
That and, if you're 22, you were 9-10 when Jordan won his last ring. And still pooping in diapers when he won his first. Still in your Dad's sack when he was coming up just short vs. Bad Boy Pistons.
Example. Argument I had with a younger friend ...he claimed Kobe is the better pure scorer. I say, Jordan averaged 30 for his career and over 30 8 seasons. Above 50% FG 6 times. Kobe averaged over 30 three times and never came close to 50%. His reponse was "Yeah, but still."
Those are the type of people who are responsible for this even being a debate.
quote:
Not really. Kobe passed Jordan in game-winning shots two years ago. Kobe takes and hits more crazy-ass shots than Jordan ever did. That is a fact. If you don't believe it,
MJ and the Bulls did not play as many close games because MJ would put the nail in the coffin in the 3rd/early 4th. It's hard to hit a game winning shot when you are ahead by 15.
[This message has been edited by BBDP (edited 7/6/2010 11:16a).]
The fact that MJ is still the basis for comparison for all time greatness is fact enough to prove he is still the one.
bump
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
quote:
If mj was in the nba for those two years, and he was for a half season, dream would have still been the best player in the league.
So you're saying that when Jordan returned full time, Hakeem by his own accord quit being the best player in the league? Which would be sort of a bizarre (not to mention untrue) statement since he was as good (if not better) the season after the second championship.
Further, Jordan was NOT in for a "half season." He played 17 games and had roughly 1/6th of his minutes from 2 years prior and the year after. Its a slam dunk that the Bulls would have won those 2 titles had Jordan been in the league and played a significant amount of time.
Kobe and Shaq ****ed up not swallowing their pride and playing together. They would've won another 5+ rings together.
quote:
Kobe and Shaq ****ed up not swallowing their pride and playing together. They would've won another 5+ rings together.
Shaq was pretty much worthless three years after he was traded. He was good but not that dominant in 06 on the heat run.
At this point I think you could certainly make a strong argument that Duncan is the greater all time player compared to Kobe. Resume wise they are very close when it comes to AS and All NBA lists and they both have 5 Titles. Duncan was the last truly elite basketball talent to go for 4 years of college and was the consensus best player his final 2 years and has had far more consistent success in his career and continued to play at a higher level longer as he nearly got another Finals MVP in the Spurs last one.
Jordan still is the best though and it really isn't a serious debate, not for anyone that actually remembers him playing. He was so much better than everyone else it was almost unfair. His only downfall was at some point he was so far out in front he had nothing left to accomplish so we will never really know how great he could have been. It's also noteworthy that he won a NC in Carolina and was a tremendous college player before going to the NBA and that cost him 3 years of stats that Kobe has. He was the basketball Babe Ruth. I say this as someone who almost always rooted against him and really didn't care for him personally at all. The talent though was impossible not to respect, with that I would say he and Kobe shared that trait.
It's also noteworthy that Kobe was only able to win Titles with heavily stacked teams. He was far more interested in personal accomplishments than Duncan or MJ. Kobe is a Top 10 All Time player but I would have a lot of trouble putting him ahead of MJ, Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Russell, or Duncan.
Jordan still is the best though and it really isn't a serious debate, not for anyone that actually remembers him playing. He was so much better than everyone else it was almost unfair. His only downfall was at some point he was so far out in front he had nothing left to accomplish so we will never really know how great he could have been. It's also noteworthy that he won a NC in Carolina and was a tremendous college player before going to the NBA and that cost him 3 years of stats that Kobe has. He was the basketball Babe Ruth. I say this as someone who almost always rooted against him and really didn't care for him personally at all. The talent though was impossible not to respect, with that I would say he and Kobe shared that trait.
It's also noteworthy that Kobe was only able to win Titles with heavily stacked teams. He was far more interested in personal accomplishments than Duncan or MJ. Kobe is a Top 10 All Time player but I would have a lot of trouble putting him ahead of MJ, Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Russell, or Duncan.
Simmons currently has it
1. Jordan
2. Russell
3. KAJ
4. Magic
5. Bird
6. Bron
7. Duncan
8. Wilt
9. Kobe
10. West
You also have to look at competition. I think Kobe's 09 and 10 titles came in the two weakest years of the Western Conference in the past 20 years. The Celtics and the Lakers were really the only two elite teams. In both years, the Lakers were the only team to top 55 wins.
I still think the NBA should be judged pre-1980 and post-1980. That was the year of the 3-point line and also Bird/Magic's rookie season. The only elite players that were really elite on both sides of that were KAJ, Dr. J, and George Gervin. Everyone else worth talking about fits pretty neatly in one era or the other. The league was a lot different when you could trade two weeks of the Ice Capades to Rochester for Bill Russell, which is how the Celtics got him.
1. Jordan
2. Russell
3. KAJ
4. Magic
5. Bird
6. Bron
7. Duncan
8. Wilt
9. Kobe
10. West
You also have to look at competition. I think Kobe's 09 and 10 titles came in the two weakest years of the Western Conference in the past 20 years. The Celtics and the Lakers were really the only two elite teams. In both years, the Lakers were the only team to top 55 wins.
I still think the NBA should be judged pre-1980 and post-1980. That was the year of the 3-point line and also Bird/Magic's rookie season. The only elite players that were really elite on both sides of that were KAJ, Dr. J, and George Gervin. Everyone else worth talking about fits pretty neatly in one era or the other. The league was a lot different when you could trade two weeks of the Ice Capades to Rochester for Bill Russell, which is how the Celtics got him.
quote:I love Larry Bird and he was one of my favorite players ever to watch but he is not the #5 player all time unless you have Celtic glasses like Simmons. His resume doesn't match up to the others. Bron isn't above Duncan either, not unless he wins a few titles in Cleveland. I'd put Russell lower but it really just depends on how much you want to give him credit for all the rings with a stacked Celtic team in a tiny NBA at the time where the road to the Title was a breeze compared to now. I seriously doubt Russell could have won 5 Titles in a similarly competitive NBA with Free Agency and Salary Caps. Russell is an incredible man though and a tremendous competitor.
Simmons currently has it
1. Jordan
2. Russell
3. KAJ
4. Magic
5. Bird
6. Bron
7. Duncan
8. Wilt
9. Kobe
10. West
You also have to look at competition. I think Kobe's 09 and 10 titles came in the two weakest years of the Western Conference in the past 20 years. The Celtics and the Lakers were really the only two elite teams. In both years, the Lakers were the only team to top 55 wins.
I still think the NBA should be judged pre-1980 and post-1980. That was the year of the 3-point line and also Bird/Magic's rookie season. The only elite players that were really elite on both sides of that were KAJ, Dr. J, and George Gervin. Everyone else worth talking about fits pretty neatly in one era or the other. The league was a lot different when you could trade two weeks of the Ice Capades to Rochester for Bill Russell, which is how the Celtics got him.
quote:I agree on all points. Duncan has 5 rings and his team is on pace for 67 wins. He should finish this year 6th in rebounds (1st in rebounds post 1980), 5th in blocks and 10th in points. The only other person top 10 in points, rebounds and blocks is Kareem.
I love Larry Bird and he was one of my favorite players ever to watch but he is not the #5 player all time unless you have Celtic glasses like Simmons. His resume doesn't match up to the others. Bron isn't above Duncan either, not unless he wins a few titles in Cleveland. I'd put Russell lower but it really just depends on how much you want to give him credit for all the rings with a stacked Celtic team in a tiny NBA at the time where the road to the Title was a breeze compared to now. I seriously doubt Russell could have won 5 Titles in a similarly competitive NBA with Free Agency and Salary Caps. Russell is an incredible man though and a tremendous competitor.
LeBron is 2-6 in the Finals? That's not so great. Duncan is 5-1. Kobe is 5-1. Jordan 6-0. Karl Malone is 0-3. He isn't top 10, but it deserves to be said that that the man that knocked up a 13 year old girl chocked over and over when it mattered.
Russell would have been a SF if he played in today's NBA. No way he could guard guys like Shaq in the post.
I can't take a list seriously that has Wilt Chamberlain so low. They changed MULTIPLE rules in the game to make it more of a challenge for him. Simmons is a moron for having Russell so high and Wilt so low.
quote:Only won two titles, the second of which was when he was the #4 scorer on the team behind two HOF guards in their prime in Goodrich and West.
I can't take a list seriously that has Wilt Chamberlain so low. They changed MULTIPLE rules in the game to make it more of a challenge for him. Simmons is a moron for having Russell so high and Wilt so low.
Where would you put Wilt? He dominated a time when a 2-time MVP and one of the best players in the league retired so he could take a job in insurance because it paid more.
How would you rank the top ten?
quote:If the list is about greatest athletes that changed the game, absolutely. If it is about greatest players though Wilt takes a hit because his teams rarely won and he wasn't known as a great pressure player. It especially hurts him because the league was small back then and you only had to win a couple of playoff series to win the title, nothing like the slugfest teams have to go through now. Titles matter on these lists. Does Simmons go overboard on Russell? Sure, but he's a freaking Celtic homer so what do you expect.
I can't take a list seriously that has Wilt Chamberlain so low. They changed MULTIPLE rules in the game to make it more of a challenge for him. Simmons is a moron for having Russell so high and Wilt so low.
I do think there is something to be said for looking at the players prior to the 70's in a different category, the NBA wasn't much of anything back then compared to now with few teams, no free agency, and a short road to the Title. I'd be fine with taking Wilt and Russell off the list from a comparison perspective.
quote:Same reason Bird is still #5 on his list. Bird and LeBron are very comparable players, only LeBron is a much better defensive player. Bird has one more title, but Bird had a LOT of help on those teams.
Does Simmons go overboard on Russell? Sure, but he's a freaking Celtic homer so what do you expect.
81 Celtics HOFers based on their NBA Career:
Larry Bird
Tiny Archibald
Kevin McHale
Robert Parrish
84 Subsititued HOFer Dennis Johnson for Tiny.
86 added HOFer Bill Walton.
All three had Cedric Maxwell. 84 and 86 both had Danny Ainge.
It took more than 30 years for basketball to adjust to the 3 point line and use it efficiently. The Warriors are a special group but they may be the 1st team that uses it to its full potential.
As for Bird:
His career stats are way off the rest. He did not get to the NBA until after 5 years in college and his body broke down early; but for an 8-10 year period, he was as good as anyone has ever been. Scored close to 30 3 or 4 years, averaged 10 boards, and close to 7 assist. He played defense and was always close to 50/40/90. Comparing primes; his stats were better than LeBron in everything except for blocks (points too but Bird was much more efficient with similar points). Compare 83-84 through 87-88 to any 4 of LJ's.
He was fun to watch.
If you compare careers, he does not belong in the top 5, but if you compare dominance, he was as good as any of them except Jordan IMO. Loved watching him and Magic!
As for Bird:
His career stats are way off the rest. He did not get to the NBA until after 5 years in college and his body broke down early; but for an 8-10 year period, he was as good as anyone has ever been. Scored close to 30 3 or 4 years, averaged 10 boards, and close to 7 assist. He played defense and was always close to 50/40/90. Comparing primes; his stats were better than LeBron in everything except for blocks (points too but Bird was much more efficient with similar points). Compare 83-84 through 87-88 to any 4 of LJ's.
He was fun to watch.
If you compare careers, he does not belong in the top 5, but if you compare dominance, he was as good as any of them except Jordan IMO. Loved watching him and Magic!
quote:
How would you rank the top ten?
1. Jordan
2. Kareem
3. Magic
4. Oscar Robertson
5. Wilt Chamberlain
6. Tim Duncan
7. Bill Russell
8. Jerry West
9. LeBron James
10. Larry Bird
Jordan
Kareem
Magic
Bird
Kobe
Wilt
Shaq
Hakeem
Duncan
West
Kareem
Magic
Bird
Kobe
Wilt
Shaq
Hakeem
Duncan
West
I don't see a reasonable case for putting Bryant in the top 10.
Head Ninja In Charge
Joined:
Oct 10, 2005
Posts:
19,026
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
3rd all-time scoring, 5 rings, 1 MVP (should have been 2), all world offense and defense at his peak. Yeah, no reasonable case.
The MVP Bryant got was a career achievement award, and there are 12 players with 2 or more MVPs. He's a great player, but there have been a number of players who are as great or greater.
Featured Stories
See All
16:42
16h ago
2.8k
All-American Jace LaViolette motivated by A&M baseball's brotherhood
by Ryan Brauninger
27:26
1d ago
6.6k
20:23
17h ago
5.4k
5 Thoughts: No. 8 Texas A&M 69, Georgia 53
by Luke Evangelist