Reply With Quote
Let's not forget the number of times each player beat the crap out of Steve Kerr. Jordan has a decided advantage in that category.
I would have addressed this in a given thread, but the argument pops up in many threads. I'd rather just centralize it here.
People are getting personally insulted at the mere idea of comparing Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant. Apparently, the idea is so ludicrous, we dare not make the attempt.
Well, I don't work that way. And for what it's worth, I think MJ is the better player, but I'd rather closely examine the issue to see how wide the gap is between the two.
This idea is not without its dangers, the most pressing of which is that the Great Deity MJ Himself will become angry with me and ruin my crops. However, in the name of seeking accuracy I go forward.
As I've explained in the thread "ESPN Page 2: Kobe is better than Michael", to get a better handle on one players stats versus another's, one must place the numbers into a normalizing context. Otherwise, the raw numbers will appear to be conclusive proof of superiority one way or the other, when in fact it was easier to score in this era or that era.
Here are MJ and Kobe's scoring outputs at the same age, expressed in terms of a percentage of team's points rather than comparing scoring averages. It's hard to give equal weight to scoring averages when one team scores 97 points a game and the other team scores 105 points a game - this is why I use the percentage method.
I'll begin by comparing scoring percentages - I list the next highest percentage teammate with that player to point out what sort of scoring help Kobe and Michael had to work with. Just another way to put all of this along the same line.
MJ age 22 (Orlando Woolridge)
scored 25.9% of team's points (Woolridge 19.8%)
Kobe age 22 (Shaquille O'Neal)
scored 18% of team's points (O'Neal 28.4%)
(MJ was injured most of 1986 season, so I left age 23 out)
MJ age 24 (Charles Oakley - seriously!)
scored 35.4% of team's points (Oakley 13.9%)
Kobe age 24 (Shaq)
scored 24.3% of team's points (Shaq 21.9%)
MJ age 25 (Oakley again!)
scored 33.3% of team's points (Oakley 11.8%)
Kobe age 25 (Shaq)
scored 29.9% of team's points (Shaq 22.4%)
MJ age 26 (Scottie Pippen)
scored 30.2% of team's points (Pippen 12%)
Kobe age 26 (Shaq)
scored 19.3% of team's points (Shaq 17.9%)
MJ age 27 (Pippen)
scored 30.7% of team's points (Pippen 15%)
Kobe age 27 - first year without Shaq (Caron Butler)
scored 22.5% of team's points (Butler 14.8%)
MJ age 28 (Pippen)
scored 28.6% of team's points (Pippen 16.2%)
Kobe age 28 (Lamar Odom)
scored 34.7% of team's points (Odom 14.5%)
Now, in the same manner, I present the percentage of team assists for both players. There are no additional factors to consider here, as neither player played with an outstanding assist man such as Nash, Stockton, Mark Jackson, etc.:
MJ age 22
produced 24.2% of team's assists
Kobe age 22
produced 16.8% of team's assists
(MJ was injured most of 1986 season, so I left age 23 out)
MJ age 24
produced 17.6% of team's assists
Kobe age 24
produced 23.3% of team's assists
MJ age 25
produced 22.6% of team's assists
Kobe age 25
produced 25.2% of team's assists
MJ age 26
produced 29.4% of team's assists
Kobe age 26
produced 16.9% of team's assists
MJ age 27
produced 23.9% of team's assists
Kobe age 27
produced 23.8% of team's assists
MJ age 28
produced 20.5% of team's assists
Kobe age 28
produced 20.8% of team's assists
And finally, I present the shooting percentages for both players as expressed this way - FG% relative to team's adjusted FG% (minus 3FG%). This is the best way I can see to provide context for these statistics. Certainly, shooting 50% today is much more difficult to do in 2007 than it was in 1987 - my method puts these percentages on a straight line.
After gathering the player's and team's 2-point percentages, I divide the player's percentage by the team's percentage. A number over 1.00 means the player was shooting a better percentage than his team was.
Let's start with both players at age 22. For Michael, that was 1985. For Kobe that was 2000. Jordan's 2-point FG% relative to his team in 1985 was 1.05. Doing the same thing with Kobe in 2000 gives also gives us a figure of 1.05.
Why exclude three-point shooting? Three point shooting strategy has changed drastically over the years. In 1985, the Bulls made 29 threes and attempted 161 threes. In 2000, Kobe by himself made 46 and attempted 144. This has nothing to do with Kobe shooting too much or anything like that - Kobe was 4th on his own team in both categories in 2000 (behind Glen Rice, Rick Fox, and Derek Fisher). All these numbers reflect is a shift in strategies by NBA coaches over time; when they realized that the three was good for more than just an occasional surprise weapon or desparation comeback tool, three point attempts and makes grew over time. Removing the three from this discussion eliminates that weirdness.
Anyway, here is the relative 2FG% for both players:
MJ age 22
1.05 relative 2FG%
Kobe age 22
1.05 relative 2FG%
(MJ was injured most of 1986 season, so I left age 23 out)
MJ age 24
1.02 relative FG%
Kobe age 24
1.00 relative FG%
MJ age 25
1.13 relative FG%
Kobe age 25
.971 relative FG%
MJ age 26
1.12 relative FG%
Kobe age 26
.961 relative FG%
MJ age 27
1.10 relative FG%
Kobe age 27
1.01 relative FG%
MJ age 28
1.21 relative FG%
Kobe age 28
1.02 relative FG%
Of these six seasons surveyed, Kobe Bryant has shot as well has his team in four seasons and was slightly behind his team in the other two. On the other hand, Michael Jordan after his first two full seasons shot at a much higher standard than the rest of his team for the nest four seasons. So in this instance, those defending Jordan's shooting superiority are on point.
Of the preceding six full seasons completed by Bryant compared with Jordan at the same age, the following assessments seem reasonable:
Scoring: Jordan A+, Bryant A
Assists: Bryant B, Jordan B
Shooting: Jordan A++, Bryant B-
I'll be happy to do this for other catgories, and will do so if asked, but my basic point is to put these numbers on a straight line before comparing players. 35 PPG, 50% shooting, and 8 APG doesn't mean the same thing between different eras in basketball. If I compared Jordan and Bryant by raw averages, Jordan would look much superior to Kobe than he really is in these areas.
Let's not forget the number of times each player beat the crap out of Steve Kerr. Jordan has a decided advantage in that category.
Or the number of suspensions served for flailing elbows like a spastic kid with epilepsy in an attempt to draw contact each player has received. Last I checked, he threw a couple of non-flailing elbows which didn't help his cause, either.
Or the number of team distractions due to feuding with other players, infidelity to his wife.....
Or how the potential of a perennial all-star has been reduced to another basic role-player on the court....
Last edited by Cry Havoc; 03-31-2007 at 12:26 PM.
Nice analysis...there's definitely a lot more to the story than pure #'s.
ASK THE EXPERT
By Sam Smith
MSNBC contributor
Updated: 2:58 p.m. MT March 29, 2007
Sam Smith
I'm saying this without hesitation: Kobe Bryant is the best player ever who scored at least 50 points in four straight games in March in two cities beginning with the letter "M." And something else Michael Jordan never could do: Bryant scored at least 50 points in games in Memphis and New Orleans. Yes, it's time for the stupid "Who's the Greatest Ever" debate.
These days this happens every year, or do now when Bryant goes off on some phenomenal scoring binge, like the nine straight of at least 40 a few years back, his 81 last season and last week's latest assault on Wilt.
To me, it was Wilt who was by far the most dominant player ever, the player who most transcended his era. Not necessarily with the championships. Likely, the scoring records never will be broken. But there never was a figure in basketball bigger than the game like Wilt was with his scoring — on and off the court, as he told it — and his effect on the game to the point the league continued to change rules to counter him because teams couldn't.
Jordan is generally regarded as that mythical best ever because of the championships and, to no small measure, the explosion of the NBA media and sneaker era, both of which featured Jordan.
Plus, he had this magnetic hold over men.
I've never seen anything in sports like it. It may have been that way with Muhammad Ali and Babe Ruth, the desire of men to be liked by him, but they mostly performed in the era before maximum media coverage.
Being around Jordan, I watched the hardest bitten reporters, the ones who had "cynical" on their business card, melt when Jordan would answer their questions by calling them by their first name, seek out eye contact and the exchanged smile. It wasn't fake with Jordan. He was a man's man, betting, boasting and beatific. Men wanted to be him; the next best thing was for him to acknowledge them.
interactive
• Rank who's leading the race this week
It's one reason Kobe never will be regarded as the best ever.
Nobody wants to be him. Well, not quite, but it's taken awhile for Bryant to begin to warm up to the populace, to shake his feud with the more personable Shaquille O'Neal, get past his court case in Colorado and sexual assault charges, and issues with supposedly breaking up the Lakers. Kobe was an island; Michael was the south of France.
Michael won the championships as the best player on his team; Kobe is more skilled with a better shot and far more range; Michael was the league's best defender; Kobe could do everything, leading the Lakers in assists every season they won a championship; Michael never had a big center to play with; how good could Kobe have been if he didn't have to defer; the league was stronger when Michael played; the players are more athletic and the preparation better now; how much would Michael have scored if they didn't allow hand checking back then? How much would Kobe score if there were no zones now?
SPECIAL FEATURE
• It's fun when you find your groove
And on and on it goes.
It is a lot like the debate you hear occasionally in golf, if you are awake enough to contribute after watching it on TV.
The old timers refuse to accept anyone could ever be better than Jack Nicklaus. Everyone else generally agrees Tiger Woods is the best.
There's really no surpassing Jordan because memory is fallible.
How often are you certain something happened years ago and it never did, or at least not the way you remembered it?
Slide show: The Week in Sports Pictures
• Week in Sports Pictures
March sadness, motorcyclist’s rocky ending, diving in darkness, and more.
This is like the life changing moment presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about in his new memoir of reading this Life magazine article when he was growing up in Indonesia about a man — not Michael Jackson — whitening his skin to conform. Obama talked about it changing his life. Only there never was an article in Life. Obama was sure, though maybe perhaps it was somewhere else.
The mind can play devilish tricks.
Like with Jordan and the media. It's as if he never missed a big shot, made a bad pass, took a selfish shot. He's like a basketball urban legend as he gets farther from the game. There's no competing against his legacy.
So why bother?
Bryant is the best player of this era. There are too many variables between eras, rules changes, quality of opponents, changes in talent and expansions.
Bryant probably is not the MVP because the Mavs and Suns will win far more games, and the vote usually goes to the best player on the best team, or close to that. The Lakers have been decimated by injuries to key players all season. They perhaps play the poorest starting lineup of any team in the West that will make the playoffs.
Which is why they are dangerous.
Coach Phil Jackson says that the reason the Lakers came so close to beating the Suns last season was that they shared the ball, and to a fault Bryant did as he was condemned in the seventh game for not shooting enough.
This season, until last week, anyway, Bryant again to a fault involved his teammates. Jackson had finally seen enough with seven straight losses and told Bryant to shoot. Scorers don't have to be told twice.
It's little realized that all this began after the blowout loss in Denver during which George Karl again seemed to run up the score, much like he did in New York, precipitating a brawl that cost Carmelo Anthony 15 games. It is said that Anthony had been taunting Bryant in that game about the scoring le and the way the Lakers were being beaten. Within a week, Bryant had virtually clinched the scoring le and the Nuggets were in another dive.
The Lakers are not particularly good. But because of Bryant they are dangerous. Like the Bulls of the late 1980's, who were knocking off better teams with more wins in the playoffs, like the Knicks and Cavaliers. The star is the x-factor in the playoffs, which is really why the best of Bryant may yet be ahead
yup, stats can't capture everything. and while the stats are clearly in mike's favor, another thing is also in mike's favor - basketball IQ. jordan is 10 times a smarter basketball player than bryant is. i never saw jordan make any of the boneheaded dumb decisions that kobe makes on a nightly basis.
Well, I've seen Jordan make dumb plays as well...Jordan was by far not the perfect baller people seem to think he was. It took him a while for his Athleticism to match his IQ....
Jordan was the consumete team leader. Players, his players, respected and feared him. He even got Rodman in his whackiest years to tow the line. That's an area where MJ is a 10 and Kobe doesn't have it.
Some people can't or are unwilling to grasp this point. It's somewhat understandable if you never saw a player play as stats are all that you have to go by though. This is why I'm usually unwilling to get into this type of a debate when a player that I didn't see play (bulk of his career) is involved. I'm guessing that a few people on here didn't see all of Jordan's career.
absence makes the heart grow fonder. kobe is still young, still in his prime. he has plenty of time to grow as a leader. this debate is silly until kobe's resume is complete.
Jordan's Washington Wizards teammates hated him. He was only respected by his Chicago teammates because they were scared of him. It wasn't respect AND fear. It was respect OUT OF fear. It has been do ented that he was a horrible teammate, and his best leadership quality was leading by example.
Maybe he had to become a mean bas to his teammates as they stood around and watched your team (Pistons) beat the ever-loving out of MJ for several years
I'm not sure we'll ever see another playing take that much physical abuse again. The current rules wouldn't allow it as the league is so damn soft now. MJ used to get pummeled by 2-3 Piston players every time he came down the lane. Flagrant fouls in today's game.
Seriously these Kobe vs. Jordan comparisons need to just end. Any ing re who thinks that Kobe is anywhere near Jordan's level should never be taken seriously on these boards ever again. Talent-wise, Kobe is definitely on Jordan's level. But Jordan completely eclipses Kobe in every other aspect of the game. Don't even bring this ing stupid bull in argument to the table anymore, people. Every time anybody tried to put up empty ing numbers to put Kobe on Jordan's level, that has been swatted out to half-court, and it will keep happening.
what is notable was the last person to drop 50 on the rock-ettes - dana barros!
Yep.
Of course, it won't matter. Some fans only care about hype and stats.
Well, I'm convinced! You insulted AND cussed!
Seriously, what kind of mental defective gets this angry on behalf of the greatest player of all time, a multi-multi-millionaire at that? I hope, monosylab1k, you actually ARE Michael Jordan - I'd hate to think some pasty white dork with a pube mustache gets this goddamned defensive over this.
Did I hit a nerve, or are you just really ing stupid?
Last edited by SRJ; 03-31-2007 at 04:46 PM.
Maybe he's tired of endless, pointless threads that involve insane amounts of headbutting about how great Kobe is, attempting to establish how close he is to Jordan's level?
Your thread is fine, but most of them are full of little else but conjecture, personal attacks, and general annoyance. They suck up space on the boards and serve little else except to say, "Well they were different eras so you can't compare them."
I'm pretty sick of it as well. I don't hate Kobe, but all this media hype when the playoffs are closing in is ridiculous. If you can't compare eras, why even pose the freaking question?
I appreciate that you see where I'm coming from on this, but it seems to me that on a discussion forum, there ought to be scope for a discussion. There's no need for anyone, on either side of the argument, to become angry.
At this point, why don't the mods just lock every thread? , go ahead put a filter on the letters KOBE sequenced in just that order. That way we don't insult Laker diehards, statheads, Michael-jockers, or old guys who think the old days were always better.
Then we can just go back to duck's threads about LeBron, game threads with full of spam, YouTube threads, and Mavs fans vs. Spur fans smack threads. Everyone will be happier then!
and there is the mouse which allows you to exit out of a thread that holds no intrest for you. some people love to just to read what they've ed about.
good thread srj.
Discussion. Not trolling or being completely oblivious to anything that doesn't involve a person's favorite team.
And you're right. A lot of the threads on these forums are pointless, boring, and shouldn't be posted in the first place. It's one reason I haven't been as active on the boards of late.
Or maybe those who are just so disgusted with the comparison should just ignore topics that talk about it.
Hard to do when they completely saturate the boards.
The question is...why do they saturate these boards....oh I don't know, maybe Kobe's climbing the ladder...if you're too stupid to see that, than maybe put the NBA on ignore...because Kobe is the only true superstar and transcendent player they have right now.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
