Wilbon: Kobe's Legacy

[InRareForm]

http://views.washingtonpost.com/world-wide-wilbon/wilbon/2010/06/kobe_bryants_legacy.html?wpisrc=nl_sports

[JamStone]

Good article.

Kobe is not in Michael's or Magic's league. Still not. And won't be any time soon or in the foreseeable future. But I do think it's interesting to open the conversation just to see what it would take for Kobe to get there. Kobe has had too many negatives over his career. Wilbon does make very good points. But I also think he doesn't look at everything either. I'd say this about Jordan, for example. If Jordan's prime coincided more with Magic's and Bird's, does he win 6 titles? I don't think he does. If Jordan's career overlapped with Shaq and Duncan, does he win 6 titles? I don't think that either. If Jordan was put on the same team as a guy like Hakeem or even Patrick Ewing where at the beginning of his career, there was not an undeniable distinction as to who the better player was and who the offense would run through, could Michael have done what he did? I question that. People knock Kobe because he played with one of the most dominant centers in the history of the game. In many ways, that helped Kobe. But from an individual greatness perspective, it also was more challenging. Both great players in their primes, there's going to be a power struggle to be alpha male. You think Jordan would easily cower to Shaq's dominance and play second fiddle? If so, then his greatness diminishes. If not, success is tougher. Kobe had to become great despite playing with such a dominant teammate. I think that is something that is kind of impressive.

Magic played with Kareem who was still great, but also an older Kareem that was willing to take a backseat. Make Kareem 8 years younger during that time, I think it makes things more interesting.

Kobe probably won't catch Michael or Magic no matter what he does the rest of his career because of how his failures are perceived. Perhaps many years later, that will change when there is revisionist history and some of those failings are lost in the memory bank. But I don't think Wilbon is right to suggest that if Kobe wins a 7th title that he couldn't be viewed as impactful as either Magic or Michael. I think if he does win a 7th, in the modern era of the NBA, his legacy will be in the conversation of that of Magic and Michael. He'll only be second to Russell. And he'll have done it in an era where it's not just one or two teams dominating year in and year out. Now, Kobe and the Lakers have to get there and that's not even on the radar yet. But that's something Wilbon mentions in the article.

I also disagree with the anonymous NBA coach Wilbon quoted who said Jordan would have averaged 42 points and shot 50% from the field in these Finals against these Boston Celtics. I don't buy that at all. Celtics are old but they still played great team defense. The defensive rules allowing schemes to shade multiple players on Kobe would be pretty difficult even for Jordan. Would he have shot better than Kobe? Yes, at least 1991-1993 Michael Jordan. I believe so because Kobe forces a lot of tough, contested jumpers and doesn't attack the basket with the same type of frequency Michael would have when jumpers are not falling. But 42 ppg on 50% shooting against these Celtics? Jordan was unbelievable but no. I can't buy that.

Overall a good article. And I agree with much of it. It's good reading considering a lot of the threads and posts that are on these boards lately.

One interesting thing Wilbon said was this:


I'm not sure if I started a team today and had to win one game to save my own life that I wouldn't take Magic above Jordan.

[duhoh]

jamstone droppin wisdom. good stuff.

[MiamiHeat]

wow, that article sounds like the stuff I write.

Good job Wilbon :)

[Darrin]

I pass the Fat Lever test and don't qualify to talk about the 1980s players.

[Cane]

Yea there's a lot of internet NBA fans that are in the teens-early twenties range...and they're usually the ones with the most time/posts and would kick Wilbon's ass in HALO since younger people grew up with tech. Nothing wrong with that but its hard to have a perspective as respected as people who've actually witnessed, analyzed, and ranked the GOATs and saw how the sport, league, players, and the world changed.

There's a ton of footage available online though and full games from decages ago available on youtube, etc. Not to mention a ton of documentaries, championship DVD's, and there's plenty of easy and quick reads like Phil Jackson's books (especially if you're interested how he dealt with Shaq and Kobe, MJ, buddhism, coaching, etc) and much more.

[Ashy Larry]

There's like this line that he has to cross or a room that he has to be invited into.


You take five players, only five. What five players would be in that room? Personally, I'd say:

Jabbar, without question. Number and rings to match anyone

Jordan, see Jabbar

Magic and Larry. NBA was dead and they revived a dead league. Imagine us watching that NBA Game 7 on tape delay.

And Russell. Picking Russell over Wilt is difficult but this is a team game and all dude did was just win. 11/13. Winning 84% of the time doesn't suck.

In my room, you have those five: Cap, Magic, MJ, Bird and Russell. If Kobe is to get in, who drops from that five? More than likely Bird and that's hard for me to do. Even though I couldn't stand that ugly bastard, watching that pale bastard play was a thing of beauty.