Ventre - Better than MJ? Kobe can make case

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/24918034/

Ventre: Better than MJ? Kobe can make case
Beating Celtics, adding more titles could put Bryant ahead of Jordan
OPINION
By Michael Ventre
updated 1:50 p.m. PT, Sun., June. 1, 2008
Over the years, Michael Jordan comparisons have been as frequent as Shaquille O'Neal misses at the free throw line. It seems every Tom, ***, Harry and Kobe who comes along inspires the old, "Is he the next Jordan?" cacophony. It's almost as if people weren't happy enough with the first Jordan, so they embark on a crusade to find a new one.

There is no "next Jordan." There is, and always will be, just one. He won six championships. He was a middling outfielder in double A. He yelled at Kwame Brown a lot.

But what about Jordan's title of "Greatest Player Ever"? Is that up for debate? Time marches on, and memories fade. All of a sudden, Jordan's accomplishments are but a dim memory, trotted out occasionally in highlight form, while present-day hot shots vie to fill his hallowed high tops.

It's hard to say at this moment in history that Kobe Bryant has supplanted Jordan as "The Greatest Player Ever," for a variety of reasons. Yet would it be sacrilege to suggest that, if the guy leads these Los Angeles Lakers past the Boston Celtics in the 2008 NBA Finals, he at least belongs in the discussion?

Would that be hardwood heresy?

I think not.

Right now, Jordan's grip on the moniker is secure, despite the passage of time as well as a failure of stewardship with the Washington Wizards and a "The jury is still out, but leaning toward conviction" stint with the Charlotte Bobcats.

The man led the Chicago Bulls to six championships. He was impossible to guard. His game matured with each passing season. He set a standard of excellence in practice that kept his teammates from settling for less. And he was as clutch a performer as there ever has been.

Yes, his legend was enhanced greatly by the marketing campaigns that hitched a ride on his basketball star. He certainly was a brand unto himself, and the advertising of his shoes served to trumpet the individual as well.

But he's still The Man among the basketball cognoscenti. His reputation as a player has staying power.

Kobe's case to be included as a candidate is complicated. It involves basketball and personal issues. There are probably as many character witnesses in his corner as there are detractors. And much of the anti-Kobe sentiment is the result of his own actions and behavior.

In hoop terms, Bryant is probably as spectacular in every phase of the game as Jordan ever was. He can drive to the hoop in the most daunting of circumstances and finish with the same acrobatic flourish as the former Bulls' star. He can nail outside shots under duress, with the final seconds of a game ticking away and his team behind, and like Jordan he does so as if he's playing HORSE in the backyard.

After a long struggle with questionable basketball judgment, he is finally making the kinds of decisions that Jordan used to make. Kobe rarely makes a dumb play these days, and this season he almost never has gone one-against-three when there are open teammates waiting for the ball. He's a tenacious defender and a great leader.

Kobe has a lot more baggage. The days feuding with Shaq. The Colorado incident. The occasional tantrums. The scheme to have owner Jerry Buss cowtow to his every whim before he would sign a new contract. And, of course, the "Trade me" tirade of last spring.

But really, none of that works against him as much as this:

Jordan has six rings. Kobe only has three.


In this American sporting society, it's all about the hardware. Joe Montana is clearly a better quarterback than Troy Aikman, because Montana has four rings and Aikman only three. Forget the many variables that should also be involved - the levels of competition, the coaching staffs, the supporting casts, injuries, etc. - what people want to know is, "How many championships?"


That doesn't mean two players on radically different plateaus are assessed only by titles. Kurt Rambis has four rings from his days with the Lakers. Karl Malone has none. Yet only one is Hall of Fame material.

But in this comparison, Bryant still has some catching up to do. And he could do it.

Jordan won his six titles with one other star in Scottie Pippen (and partly with another, if you count madman Dennis Rodman), but with an impressive array of role players. Michael's achievements are viewed with widespread admiration. The glistening bling of those years still keeps the basketball populace in awe.

Kobe won three titles with more help, so those are not viewed predominantly as his doing. He had Shaq, Derek Fisher, Rick Fox, Robert Horry and others, not to mention Phil Jackson. He was not the perceived leader of that team, even though he was an indispensable and vital presence.

But if he happens to lead this Lakers team to paydirt against Boston, it will spit-shine his "Best Ever" credentials. A year ago, this assemblage was a contestant for the No. 8 seed in the West - if not the lottery. This season it finished as the top seed in the conference and has outclassed Denver, Utah and San Antonio. And Kobe Bryant is the primary reason.

And next year, the Lakers should be even better, with Andrew Bynum and Trevor Ariza back and perhaps another addition or two. That means if they win these Finals, it's possible they could continue building a dynasty.

Kobe might actually catch Michael in rings. In fact, it's not lunacy to suggest Kobe could even surpass him.

Then what?

That would throw the "Greatest Player Ever" debaters into a tizzy. But for now, maybe it would be wise if we slipped the name "Kobe Bryant" into the discussion, just to be safe.

Michael Ventre is a contributor to NBCSports.com and a freelance writer based in Los Angeles.

.

Quantcast