Jesse BlanchardThe Great 2009 Kobe vs. Lebron Debate: Creationism vs. Evolution
May 31st 2009 18:26
The Devil’s greatest trick was convincing the world he didn’t exist. Michael Jordan’s greatest feat was convincing it that basketball greatness is measured in the boundaries of 6-foot-6, 40-inch verticals.
And whether we are aware of it or not, it is the legacy of Air Jordan that has made the Kobe v. Lebron debate so heated in its intensity.
The Chicago grounds Jordan flew over became hallowed, his work looked upon almost as a body of religion in the basketball world. Perceptions changed. The next Wilt and the next Russell became the search for the next Jordan.
Grant Hill. Vince Carter. Tracy McGrady. Dwyane Wade. At the heart of the search for the next high-flying wing to build around was Kobe Bryant.
His career arch mirroring Jordan—his transformation from high-flying champion to coldblooded midrange tactician—Bryant has been labeled by some (mistakenly) as the greatest player. And it’s an almost rational and somewhat comforting logic by those who advocate Bryant as the best:
Michael Jordan is the best that ever played. Kobe Bryant is the player most similar to Michael Jordan. Therefore Kobe Bryant is the best.
It’s certainly a logical argument. It works within the framework of what we know and holds true to our values.
But much like the theory of creationism sufficed before being supplanted by Darwin’s theory of evolution, a new player is laying claim to the title of world’s best player. And once again questioning people’s faith is creating quite a stir.
After all, how many were persecuted for believing the world was round? Or that everything revolved around the sun?
It’s fitting that James be the player to take up the mantle as greatest player. As an athlete, he’s almost on another plane of evolution. After all, outside of his jersey number, very little of Lebron James resembles Jordan.
At 6-foot-9 and roughly 270 pounds, James physically is more comparable to Karl Malone than Jordan. His style, while jaw-dropping, lacks the level of artistry of Bryant and his template, Jordan. It’s more violent than creative. More raw than refined. Sort of like a young Shawn Kemp.
As ESPN TrueHoop’s Henry Abbott put it, “(Lebron) just doesn’t move like the best player in the world”.
That’s where this debate gets heated. What, exactly, does the best player in the world look like? Bryant fits the mold as the greatest difficult shot maker in today’s NBA. In some ways, he may even surpass Jordan in this regard. This is why everyone agrees they would pick Bryant over everyone for the honors of last shot.
But as Bill Walton use to say, never mistake activity for achievement. Or, in this case, skill set for dominance. The NBA might be defined by creativity, and certainly Bryant has more of it than anyone else in the league, but it is ruled by dominance.
Lebron James does not have Michael Jordan’s skill set because, quite simply, he doesn’t need it. Whereas Bryant might be able to execute an intricate set of feints and jabs to get off a shot, James can simply blow past his defender and rise over the rest of the defense.
Jordan remained so dominant late in his career, in part, because he convinced an entire generation that his success was keyed into his highlights. They served to mask what he and few others understood: Basketball is a simple game ruled by efficiency and intelligence.
Bill Russell define these traits. Larry Bird and Magic Johnson carried them on. The two best players of the past decade, Shaq and Tim Duncan, understood it. And despite being un-Jordanesque visually, James owns it too.
Simple and efficient in a way completely unlike anything we have ever seen before. And while these playoffs may not decide the better player, James has at least opened up eyes to other styles of greatness.
Let the debate continue.
And whether we are aware of it or not, it is the legacy of Air Jordan that has made the Kobe v. Lebron debate so heated in its intensity.
The Chicago grounds Jordan flew over became hallowed, his work looked upon almost as a body of religion in the basketball world. Perceptions changed. The next Wilt and the next Russell became the search for the next Jordan.
Grant Hill. Vince Carter. Tracy McGrady. Dwyane Wade. At the heart of the search for the next high-flying wing to build around was Kobe Bryant.
His career arch mirroring Jordan—his transformation from high-flying champion to coldblooded midrange tactician—Bryant has been labeled by some (mistakenly) as the greatest player. And it’s an almost rational and somewhat comforting logic by those who advocate Bryant as the best:
Michael Jordan is the best that ever played. Kobe Bryant is the player most similar to Michael Jordan. Therefore Kobe Bryant is the best.
It’s certainly a logical argument. It works within the framework of what we know and holds true to our values.
But much like the theory of creationism sufficed before being supplanted by Darwin’s theory of evolution, a new player is laying claim to the title of world’s best player. And once again questioning people’s faith is creating quite a stir.
After all, how many were persecuted for believing the world was round? Or that everything revolved around the sun?
It’s fitting that James be the player to take up the mantle as greatest player. As an athlete, he’s almost on another plane of evolution. After all, outside of his jersey number, very little of Lebron James resembles Jordan.
At 6-foot-9 and roughly 270 pounds, James physically is more comparable to Karl Malone than Jordan. His style, while jaw-dropping, lacks the level of artistry of Bryant and his template, Jordan. It’s more violent than creative. More raw than refined. Sort of like a young Shawn Kemp.
As ESPN TrueHoop’s Henry Abbott put it, “(Lebron) just doesn’t move like the best player in the world”.
That’s where this debate gets heated. What, exactly, does the best player in the world look like? Bryant fits the mold as the greatest difficult shot maker in today’s NBA. In some ways, he may even surpass Jordan in this regard. This is why everyone agrees they would pick Bryant over everyone for the honors of last shot.
But as Bill Walton use to say, never mistake activity for achievement. Or, in this case, skill set for dominance. The NBA might be defined by creativity, and certainly Bryant has more of it than anyone else in the league, but it is ruled by dominance.
Lebron James does not have Michael Jordan’s skill set because, quite simply, he doesn’t need it. Whereas Bryant might be able to execute an intricate set of feints and jabs to get off a shot, James can simply blow past his defender and rise over the rest of the defense.
Jordan remained so dominant late in his career, in part, because he convinced an entire generation that his success was keyed into his highlights. They served to mask what he and few others understood: Basketball is a simple game ruled by efficiency and intelligence.
Bill Russell define these traits. Larry Bird and Magic Johnson carried them on. The two best players of the past decade, Shaq and Tim Duncan, understood it. And despite being un-Jordanesque visually, James owns it too.
Simple and efficient in a way completely unlike anything we have ever seen before. And while these playoffs may not decide the better player, James has at least opened up eyes to other styles of greatness.
Let the debate continue.
| 49 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
