No way... MJ re-defined the sport and led the Bulls to 6 Championships (if not for retirement MJ would have won more). MJ was not only a great player but he made his teammates better players as well. Although Kobe is outstanding and comparable, in my personal mind he needs to show me more titles. The team aspect is as important as the individual aspect of the game, gimme 3 more championships and maybe I'll consider Kobe.
2007-03-27 11:15:31
·
answer #1
·
answered by JV 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
Kobe's got one in the bag already. He is probably the best scorer in NBA history. He has to dominate in a few other areas before we can call him the best all around player ever though. That title still belongs to MJ.
People seem to forget that Jordan was not only the best offensive player of his time, but most of his career he was the best defender too. In the 80's and 90's with the exception of Hakeem Olajuwon, there was no other defensive player as dominant as Jordan. He won defensive player of the year once, but many times he was the leauges best defender. He led the league in steals 3 times, averaging over 3 a game and also averaged over 1.5 blocks multiple times in his career. Did you get that? 3 steals and 1 or 2 blocks every single game for an entire season! Kobe has yet to make that kind of impact on the defensive end. He is a good defensive player, but he will need to dominate the way Jordan did to truely be the greatest player ever.
The most important part has less to do with individual performance and more of how the organization builds around Kobe. The Bulls owned the leauge for 6 seasons. If you could divide the credit for those 6 championships, I'd say Jordan gets 20%, the supporting cast gets 20%, coaching gets 20%, and ownership gets 40% for putting the peices in place. Kobe needs the Lakers front office to be as great with personnel as the Bulls were in building around Jordan. They have the exact same coaching staff, so no worries there. If the front office does it's part then it's all on Kobe to lead his teamates to NBA dominance. It's not likely all those things will happen for Kobe, but if they do the debate will be over, Kobe will be seen in the eyes of many as the greatest player in NBA history.
2007-03-27 20:36:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
its true Kobe's 53.0 points per game average over his last 5 games is impressive but that does not deem him better than MJ Kobe may have a chance to be better than MJ when hes done with his career but for right now Kobe is not better than MJ
2007-03-27 18:24:52
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Perhaps not as an all around player, but offensively, even Steve Kerr is wondering if Kobe might be the most complete offensive package ever to play the game... and we ALL know who Kerr played with...
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=sk-rankings032607&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
Steve Kerr writes: " In the past five games, Kobe Bryant has averaged 54 points per game. Think about that for a moment. Fifty four! Most importantly, the Los Angeles Lakers won all five, reversing a seven-game losing streak that had threatened to ruin their season.
In effect, Bryant placed the entire team on his shoulders and willed it back into a positive state. The Lakers are now confident again, they have Luke Walton and Lamar Odom back from injuries and they're no longer looking like road kill for the West's top seeds come playoff time. And they owe it all to Kobe.
His offensive game is so good, so fundamentally sound in every aspect, that it may be time to debate whether or not he's the most complete offensive player in the history of the NBA. I'm not talking about the best player – there are plenty of players who rank well ahead of Bryant in that category. I'm simply wondering if there has ever been a player with a more complete skill set with footwork, ball handling, perimeter shooting and leaping ability. "
You heard it from Steve Kerr himself.
2007-03-27 19:38:00
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
You know what baffles me? People start talking about titles, etc, etc... Well AC Green has more titles than Malone and Barkley, but no one would consider him a better player than either one of those guys. Michael had the benefit of playing with Scottie Pippen who guarded the opposing teams best offensive player, Kobe doesn't, so Michael stayed fresh on offense. Kobe has the luck of passing it to people like Devean Geaorge, Julius Jones, Smush Parker, etc... Jordan had pure shooters on the the Bulls squads, I guess people forget about that. Jordan without any doubt was unstoppable just like Kobe is, but when they cheat on defense, he can easily make Steve Kerr, BJ Armstrong, John Paxson better players because they're pure shooters who were consistent. If you put Kobe on those teams, I'm thinking he wins six championships also.
2007-03-27 19:43:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by gemfow 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nope, For one reason. MJ made his team better. Kobe is selfish and will never get to another championship playing that way. MJ started his career being selfish and figured it out. Kobe seemed to be figuring it out when Shaq was there, now he is back to his old selfish ways. Kobe is just about the stats. Kind of like Iverson.
2007-03-27 18:08:22
·
answer #6
·
answered by Paul S 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
There is only one MJ just like there was only one B. Russell, Kareem,Shaq etc: Each has their own strong points and each their own weaknesses. Kobe is Kobe only time will tell if he should be lined up with the Greats of Basketball.
2007-03-27 18:05:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by hodag1942 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
Its 54 points a game and NO he is not better than MJ. Hes not even on the same level as MJ was.
2007-03-27 18:27:52
·
answer #8
·
answered by Hawkbravefalconfan 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
If the Lakers win the NBA Title this year, and Kobe is MVP, I would say he ranks with the all time greats, including MJ.
2007-03-27 18:11:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by Jack Chedeville 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
helz yea. Kobe rocks.
go on yahoo front page and featured, there is Kobe
-Jaw-dropping performances
Lakers' Kobe Bryant may be the most complete offensive player – ever. Steve Kerr explains why.
2007-03-27 19:34:35
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋