CLEVELAND - Kobe Bryant will report to training camp this coming week for what will be his 14th NBA season. This past week, the Sporting News voted him the NBA player of the decade.Interesting choice.
Bryant, 31 is a legendary hoopster. What he has done in the NBA for the L.A. Lakers has been stunning, especially since he came directly from high school in 1996 without the benefit of college and averaged just 7 points per game in his rookie season. Now, he is arguably the best in the game and has compiled a glittering resume that has included 4 NBA championships.
But I'm not so sure he was the preeminent player of the 2000's.
First off, Kobe bested former teammate Shaquille O'Neal and San Antonio's Tim Duncan for the honor and initially, I felt that his selection was well merited. However, upon closer inspection, I realized that the choice of Bryant was anything but a forgone conclusion once his entire decade is taken into consideration. First off, in the five seasons from 2000 to 2004, no one regarded him as being the best in the league. That's because O'Neal and Duncan were the big-time leaders of the NBA; Shaq had dominated the three NBA titles that the Lakers won from '00 to '02 and Duncan led the Spurs to the dethroning of L.A. in '03 en route to another San Antonio championship (they won their first in the abbreviated 1999 season).
During that first half of the decade, the Lakers won three titles, with Bryant as the secondary star and O'Neal in his prime of imposing, physical dominance. True, Kobe was always the harder, more tenacious worker, but O'Neal was still the biggest reason L.A. won. The two seasons that the Lakers didn't win, 2003 and 2004 were seen as evidence of Bryant's defiance and notoriously selfish style of play. Indeed, he grew more petulant and insolent as his prodigious offensive talents blossomed further. For the first time in his career, he averaged more shot attempts and points than Shaq; 30.0 ppg in '03, thanks largely to a 13-game tear in mid-season in which he routinely dropped 40 or more points several times. At the time, O'Neal was still a prime force and should have still been the focal point of the offense.
In 2004, his frequent ill-advised shots and go-it-alone mentality cost the revamped Lakers in the Finals and though heavily favored, they lost to the Pistons. Trust me, if anyone had asked who the top player of the first five years of the 2000's was, Bryant would have been on few, if any lists as the number one. It's not that he wasn't awesome, because he was brilliant. But O'Neal and Duncan were the cornerstones and impact players of these years. Kobe was simply the best of the rest; better than Iverson, McGrady, Carter, Pierce and the like.
The second half of the decade was even less impressive for Kobe. During the five seasons since the '04-'05 season, the Lakers lost in the 1st round of the playoffs twice to Phoenix ('06 and '07), lost to the Celtics in the Finals once ('08) and missed the postseason altogether in '05. It was only during the final season of the decade (last season) that they finally won an NBA title, the first one minus O'Neal, who'd left L.A. after the '04 Finals loss. One thing did increase for Kobe during the last half of the decade; his scoring exploits. The '05-'06 season was his playground. In December 2005, he scored an unreal 62 points in just three quarters in a game vs Dallas. In January 2006, he knocked in an historic 81 points against Toronto. By season's end, he'd amassed a career high 35.4 ppg average, the highest in the NBA in nearly 20 years.
But again, the Lakers lost in round one of the playoffs.
Bryant returned the following season and dominated on offense again, posting numerous 50 and 60 point games but in spite of it all, L.A. got bounced in round one of the '07 playoffs. The past two seasons have seen a different, more sedate Bryant on offense. He has become a far more willing facilitator and thus, a better teammate. As a result, the Lakers have made the Finals both years, getting trounced in '08 and winning in '09.
In 10 seasons of the 2000's, Kobe Bryant averaged 28.2 points, 5.9 rebounds and 5.2 assists. He won one MVP award, 2 scoring titles and 4 NBA titles with one Finals MVP. He shot 46% from the floor, 84% from the foul line and 34% from the 3-point line. His teams made the Finals six times, and their record was 4-2. What's troubling is this: there were four seasons that his teams didn't make the Finals and there was an unreal seven years between NBA titles. O'Neal's teams made the Finals 5 times, Duncan's team made it three. So even if we accept Kobe's choice as player of the decade, there are so many holes in his "great" decade. He's only been considered the consensus best player in the league for maybe half of the ten years.
Which brings me to the next point in this topic; Michael Jordan.
Jordan, the recently Hall of Fame inducted icon of basketball is the man that Bryant has been repeatedly compared to since his rookie season. Though Jordan joined the NBA's Chicago Bulls in the mid-1980's, his decade of dominance was unquestionably the 1990's and trust me, no one will debate whether he was the NBA player of that decade. Jordan's decade comes with an asterisk, though. He played just seven of the ten seasons, due to two retirements and still far out shined Bryant.
Jordan's teams, in the seasons he played, went 6-0 in the NBA Finals. Jordan himself won 7 scoring titles, 4 MVP's and all 6 Finals MVP's. He also won 2 steals titles and authored several of the most historic moments in NBA playoff history. Bryant had the highest single regular season average in nearly 20 years in '06. Jordan's 41.0 ppg in the '93 Finals was the highest scoring average in Finals history.
Gigantic difference.
The only season in the '90's that the Bulls didn't win the title with MJ was the first season; 1990. That was when Jordan's postseason performance was nothing short of genius, yet the upstart team came within one victory of making the championship series. After that, Jordan steered the Bulls to a trifecta of titles in '91, '92 and '93, then retired at the apex of his career less than four months later. During the 1994 season, Chicago performed above expectations without MJ, but lost in the playoffs to New York, who went on to lose in the Finals to the eventual champion Houston Rockets. The following season was far more tempestuous for the Bulls and was wrought with dissension, especially from secondary star Scottie Pippen. Shockingly, Jordan returned to the team with just a month left, but never regained his legendary form. The Bulls lost in round 2 to Orlando, mostly because of a lack of the in shape edition of MJ for the entire season.
The Rockets repeated as champs in the '95 Finals.
The 1996 season saw the return of Jordan from Day one. As a result, he dominated the league as did his team and they rolled to an unreal 72-10 record. The Bulls won their 4th championship and MJ reclaimed his status as the league's top player.
Jordan wowed the league yet again during the 1997 season as he amassed another iconic campaign. As his age escalated, so too did his drive. Chicago was virtually unbeatable again and that resulted in NBA crown number 5, led of course by the excellence of Michael.
There was an air of finality to the 1998 season for the Bulls and Jordan, and the entire campaign was dubbed "The Last Dance." Jordan, an increasingly mythical figure by that time was revered in arenas all over the country. It was rather surreal that his basketball artistry had persisted for as long as it had, he was a ripe 35 years of age at the time and still managed to loom largest over an entire league of young stars.
It was indescribable how giant his impact had become.
After a very adversity-filled season, the Bulls traipsed through the playoffs and onto the Finals against Utah. For the second straight season, the reality of facing off against Jordan in the championship series proved to be too much for the Jazz and they lost the series as Chicago celebrated the 6th NBA title of the decade. Jordan's final jumpshot sent his ethereal legacy into an unreachable universe.
Jordan retired prior to the 10th season of the decade, and a number of the other key players went their separate ways. All in all, Jordan stamped the '90's as his personal proving ground for his stupefying greatness. His raw numbers; 30.8 points, 6.3 rebounds, 5.1 assists nearly reflect Bryant's, except for the nearly three points per game scoring difference. Jordan shot better too. He hit 50% of his shots, 83% of his free throws and 36% of his 3-pointers.
The things that stick out to me most in the comparisons are as follows. Jordan was the top player steering his teams to championships the entire decade. When he was in the lineup all season, the Bulls were practically invincible. His dominance spanned the entire decade, without huge gaps of futility. There also was no other player even remotely close to being as accomplished as MJ during the decade. For Bryant, he starred behind the gigantic dominance of O'Neal early in his decade, then endured several long years of mediocrity and losing. When his team finally won with him as the head honcho, it came after a string of other teams winning the title.
In the end, I say this: congratulations to Kobe Bryant for being voted the top player of the 2000's, but there is no way that he's anywhere close to Michael Jordan is the history of the NBA.
But then again, no one is.
No comments:
Post a Comment