L O V E L I F E said:
(2) That said - I (and you) have WATCHED both of them with our own eyes, and again, in my opinion, Kobe of ages 18 to 27 has the gretaer all-around skill set (INCLUDING the all-important things that CAN'T be shown merelyby looking at the numbers - "making your teammates better," "clutchness" "desire" "dealing with adversity" et al) than MJ had during HIS formative years.
Like "focus" or "poise"? Kobe sure showed ALOT of that Saturday night with his 2nd half disappearing act and fan-defying sideshow while his team's last hopes withered and died, no thanks to Lamar Odom of course, who apparently had also already realized Kobe's tank act himself
when he attempted to drive the lane 1-on-1 from the top of the key on 3 consecutive possessions in a desperate last-ditch effort to at least contain the slaughter.
Actually, that pretty well encapsulates Kobe's intangibles of "heart" and "dealing with adversity" as well. I should qualify that though by saying that Kobe is ACES at dealing with self-created adversity, if only from the plethora of opportunities...or perhaps "queens" is the better description since Kobe is without question one of the top 5 drama queens in the league, perhaps bested only by AI and Rasheed.
It's easy to be a holy man on top of the mountain. How wonderful for the Kobe myth that he sank 2 clutch shots up 2-1 in the series while basking in the soothing adulation of his home crowd. How wonderful for the Kobe myth that he won 3 titles in the enveloping shadow of Shaq's dominant lane presence.
However, the thing that most reveals one's true character is how one handles the gutter. Kobe displayed (imo) his true colors Saturday night when he had the opportunity to do everything he possibly could to avoid the gutter of 1st round defeat, facing a double-digit halftime deficit and a hostile crowd at the moment of absolute truth, and he flat-out disappeared. He washed his hands of the whole affair, deserted his team and left the dirty, thankless, unheralded work of desperately trying to salvage
anything to a respectable albeit clearly lesser-talented teammate who, although he had a poor game himself, at least showed the intestinal fortitude to go down fighting.
You tell me how big his "basketball heart" was, how great his "desire" was
at that moment. You tell me how beholden Kobe was to
anything except the altar of Kobe
at that moment.
Cuz then, at that moment, it AIN'T being compared to MJ's accomplishments. It ain't got nothin' to do with MJ at that moment. It's only you and what you want, and whether you're willing to go down swinging, trying to hold on to any vestige of grasping it even for an instant...then, at that very moment, it is PRECISELY "in the vacuum".
And you know the answer as well as I do. He chucked and ran, and mailed it in from somewhere else.
Face it, Kobe tuned up his fiddle while Rome was still a 2-alarm fire conceivably capable of containment.
And then, predictably, Rome burned out of control.
![:\](https://bluelight.org/xf/BL_Images/Orig_Emoji/wrygrin.gif "wry grin :\")
Whether that critical character flaw will be corrected remains to be seen.
L O V E L I F E said:
One final (for now) note and then I'm off to keep commitments to people other than myself:
Glowbug,
For all of your grace and loveability in person and on subjects other than sports, your anti-Kobe anti-Carolina anti-whomever you choose to hate in sports persona rubs me the wrong way in EXACTLY the same manner Jim Rome's does.
It's not that your words are dispicable or that your arguments lack merit.
It's simply a matter of your TONE.
In my opinion, in life, and on just about every subject not involving sports, you're an empathetic sweetheart.
But, with respect, my dear friend, when it comes to writing about sports, in my opinion, you sometimes come across (to borrow from Anglina Jolie's first great acting ever - no - I'm NOT kidding) as a big fat ANGERBALL.
Sorry LL, but when I'm writing to advocate a point, I don't take prisoners and I don't let off the gas. In my writing I always go for the kill...otherwise I'm not stepping on the court.
To that end I'll use virtually every trick and nuance in the book, including that of psychological one-upmanship perhaps misperceived by some as anger...e.g., after posting it I noted a
slight factual error in my original thesis (not a statistical computation error, mind you, and the flaw is minor, but it's there nonetheless) and debated calling foul upon myself. Had this been an earnest issue-based debate and not just a sports smack debate, I would have chosen to call foul on myself...but since this is only a sports smack debate I decided to let it slide and see if it would slip past with a no-call on the momentum of my overall arguments. Then I glossed it with a bit of "smoke and mirrors" the day after the Lakers' loss...what you misperceived as gloating was more geared toward coupling the shock of the blowout with a head fake.
There's one notable exception though. I
don't utilize personal attacks or slights, a few rare slipups notwithstanding. I (try to) hit hard with the written word, and aiming to give harder than I get-without mercy-is just part and parcel of that, but I try to play fair and ensure that I've backed up all my smack. That's why I left the minor factual error there rather than editing it...fair play is fair play, and it's still there.
It's nothing personal you understand and I appreciate the intent of the feedback, but my game is my game...it's about the best game I got goin', and I ain't gonna soften it. I'd describe it as "impassioned" myself, but if it's perceived as "angry", so be it, my style is my style. I bring the Ginobli-style debate game I got, not the MJ-style facade I wish I had.
In the realm of sports debate, perhaps it's partly a sublimated projection of my frustrated desire irl to have been a better actual on-court competitor, and partly a projection of how, as one who appreciates the team artistry in the game, I wish to see the game played...as a true team effort without the ego incursions. Like Phoenix does. Like the Spurs do. Like the Pistons do, Rasheed notwithstanding. Those guys walk the walk, they don't just talk the talk.
That's perhaps the greatest source of my enmity for Kobe, that from Day 1 (e.g., his refusing to play for Charlotte, his waving off Malone's All-Star pick, his feuding with Shaq, ad nauseam) his approach has been the exact antithesis of how I cherish seeing the game approached. Much as I despise Carolina, I give credit to Dean for instilling the team concept in MJ so that to a large degree, having tasted success through the team approach, MJ was not burdened by the glaring ego issues that Kobe seems to be.
As long as the door has been opened for well-intentioned constructive criticism, I'd have to say I find personal comments such as yours directed at Michael in poor taste. Not only does it smack of arrogance, but imo there's just no call for belittling someone personally in a mere debate, regardless of what you may think of him or her privately...and certainly not in a sports smack setting. The few times I've engaged in it, I've wished afterwards that I had sidestepped it entirely.
That said, I think I've just about blown my wad on the Kobe debate, at least until he does something spectacular and fucks up spectacularly again next year, at which time I'm sure the debate will be revisited. He'll do both, of that I'm fairly certain.
WacoWas AnAccident said:
OK, first of all MJ-Kobe comparisons are really just exercises in speculative masturbation because each one if great in his own way and there's no objective way to say which one is "greater."
MJ has the upper hand for a couple reasons. The trajectory of his career was basically tremendous and spectacular individual success to start, proving that he was just an awesome and unparalleled talent. Then when he teamed up with Phil he locked down those 6 rings. So individual success segued very nicely into championship success. Not only that, but the NBA was arguably less competitive then with regards to swingmen. I mean he didn't have a Lebron James or Tracy McGrady to compete with. He was unquestionably the best player in the League, and the NBA had never seen anyone like him at that time. A good counter-argument is that Jordan's NBA was far more physical; the way to stop Jordan was with hard fouls, whereas today a hard foul is likely to be a suspension so defenses back off. So when Jordan went for 40 or 50 it's arguably a bigger accomplishment than getting 40 in today's NBA.
As for the playoffs this season, even you glowbug have to admit that the 7th seeded Lakers, who many people didn't even think would MAKE the playoffs, taking the Suns to a game 7 is quite an accomplishment. Comparable to MJ's championships? No, and for a variety of reasons, but forget about that for now. You cannot deny that Kobe was awesome in the first 6 games. They were 6 seconds and a desperation 3 away from closing out the Suns in Game 6. A team with Smush Parker, Kwame Brown and Luke Walton in the starting lineup. Luck of the draw and Lamar not fouling Marion when he should have, but hindsight is 20/20. Kerr, Paxson, Horace Grant, Pippen, Rodman; there's no way the 2005-06 Laker roster compares. If you know anything about Mitch Kupchak, you know he's a terrible GM. Kobe carried this team all season and for 6 games in the playoffs, a team which was low on playoff experience, NBA experience and talent.
Game 7, Kobe should have dropped 65 like I wanted him to but the fact is it wouldn't have changed the outcome. After Game 6 it was over, barring a miracle. The Lakers as a team completely wilted and if anything, it showed what an accomplishment even getting up 3-1 on the Suns was. You saw just how bad Kwame Brown really is. Lamar Odom let the Suns get under his skin and played horribly. Smush went something like 5-63 in the last three games. And most importantly, if Kobe had hung 65 points on them it wouldn't have mattered because the LAKERS STOPPED PLAYING DEFENSE.
It was painful to watch Nash kill them running pick and rolls on the weak side through Boris Diaw. Kwame and Smush switched every single time, leaving either Nash to have his way with Kwame or Diaw to post up Smush. No help. The rotation was slow if it came at all. Fight through those fucking screens! How could they not figure it out? And letting Barbossa get to the rim like that for lay-up after lay-up is inexcusable. I am surprised Phil didn't have Kobe lock down Nash and fight through those screens. It seems actually rather ridiculous that that's not what happened, because Kobe is an absolute lock down defender on the perimeter.
Furthermore, comparing statistics is misleading because Jordan was the number one gunner on his team from the beginning. For 8 years Kobe was the second option on his team, even though he's arguably better than Shaq (comparing a big man with a swingman is inherently problematic however). And, in a total inversion of MJ's career, Kobe had fantastic success fairly early in his career, and now I guess his real legacy will be defined by what he does with the second half of his career. I think he will win more rings. I really do. He's just too good, and too driven. I agree he hurt his image bad in that Game 7, but he is unquestionably the best player in the League and will be for another 2-3 years.
Having said all that, Lebron will probably be better than Kobe if he stops biting his nails. If Lebron averages 45-15-15 in five years, I would not be surprised.
Well-grounded in light of the fact that it's coming from a hardcore Kobe fellata.
Though I'd disagree with the ring outlook, in part because of the Lakers' salary cap issue that hampers them through '07 and virtually ensures another rebuilding/meshing process in the next several years (in turn eating up 3 or more precious years of Kobe's prime...imo it's folly to have to
expect that Kobe run off 3 consecutive rings again in order to get there), I'm largely in agreement with many of your points.
