LeBron Versus Kobe

Chris Broussard at ESPN.com:

Though LeBron will never score 81 points in a game, he is essentially just as good of a scorer as Kobe is. He's much more efficient because he shoots a higher field-goal percentage and scores in the flow of the offense. And he doesn't dominate the ball as much as Kobe and D-Wade.

But he's, um, not a more efficient scorer. He does shoot a higher percentage (.471 versus .463) but Kobe's a better free throw shooter and hits more treys, so Kobe's TS% is better (58 versus 55.2) and his turnover rate is slightly better (9.4 versus 9.2). LeBron's advantages are better rebounding, and a superior assist rate.

Comments

And Lebron is playing for the World Championship, while Kobe is at home changing his mind about what team he wants to be on.

All for that marginal difference in scoring efficiency.

Posted by sherifffruitfly | June 5, 2007 8:51 PM

And the idea of LeBron scoring 81 points some night is not that crazy.

Posted by owenz | June 5, 2007 8:52 PM

I know you may not have noticed, but LeBron plays in the East. Kobe could get to the Finals from the East.

But yeah, to say Lebron will never score 81 is flawed, the guy is only 21.

Posted by Rob | June 5, 2007 8:54 PM

LeBron's advantages are better rebounding, and a superior assist rate.

And LeBron's a much better teammate and competitor - and I say this as a Laker/Kobe fan.

Kobe does several things better than LeBron - including defend - but he doesn't come close to inspiring his teammates the way LeBron does.

Posted by SoCalJustice | June 5, 2007 9:10 PM

Kobe's a more efficient, and all around better scorer.

LeBron's a significantly better basketball player.

Posted by Petey | June 5, 2007 9:12 PM

And the idea of LeBron scoring 81 points some night is not that crazy.

Yes. Yes, it absolutely is that crazy. It is absolutely, truly, totally that crazy. Going for 48 in a double overtime game sure has made people lose their noodle. If their's one thing that drives me utterly bugfuck about the sports world, it's the fact that the latest great performance-- thanks to the hysterical hype machine of ESPN-- has to be debated as "the greatest ever?" No, Lebron is never going to score 81 points. Never. Ever. Never ever ever ever ever.

Kobe's a more efficient, and all around better scorer.

LeBron's a significantly better basketball player.

My thoughts exactly.

Posted by Freddie | June 5, 2007 9:36 PM

assists=scoring. many assists=good offense=efficient scoring.

matthew, don't hate on lebron. you're only hurting yourself.

he is the pele of basketball.

Posted by a-train | June 5, 2007 9:45 PM

"he is the pele of basketball."

nene is the pele of basketball.

Posted by Petey | June 5, 2007 9:48 PM

one more thing:

like magic johnson and larry bird and unlike michael jordan, lebron makes the team he plays on much better. and he makes the players he plays with much, much better than they would be otherwise. both mentally and physically. kobe doesn't do that as much, neither did michael jordan.

i mean, can you imagine kobe coaching a team well? getting the most out of the people who are "his team" is just not his thing. michael jordon is the same.

but look at how successful both bird and magic were as coaches with relatively inferior teams. they could infect people with confidence. lebron is the same way.

Posted by a-train | June 5, 2007 9:56 PM

like magic johnson and larry bird and unlike michael jordan, lebron makes the team he plays on much better.

I suppose you mean that Lebron makes his team better by putting his teammates in a position that maximizes their abilities and helps them contribute to winning. I don't agree at all that Jordan didn't do that.

More importantly, though, there's another way to make your team better. And Jordan did it by being the best basketball player ever.

Posted by Freddie | June 5, 2007 10:00 PM

With some sadness I note that Petey's right re LeBron vs. Kobe. And I might take LeBron in the last four minutes for a score: Kobe doesn't have LeBron's size, and possibly lacks his speed, so I can imagine LeBron being better at getting to the rim.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | June 5, 2007 10:04 PM

but look at how successful both bird and magic were as coaches with relatively inferior teams.

Magic sucked as a coach, IIRC. He quit, didn't he? And Bird was backed up by excellent assistants.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | June 5, 2007 10:06 PM

Whoa there, bandwagon jumpers. Kobe is still a far better defender than LeBron and has a much more reliable jumper. Kobe has lost a half-step but if I were picking right now for one season, I'd still take him over Lebron. In three years, or picking for the long-term, different story.

Posted by ogged | June 5, 2007 10:14 PM

Kobe is Iverson. LeBron is Larry Bird.

Posted by Petey | June 5, 2007 10:14 PM

"I were picking right now for one season, I'd still take him over Lebron."

Not a chance in the world.

Trade them, and the Lakers become a better team than the Cavs. This ain't rocket science, folks...

Posted by Petey | June 5, 2007 10:19 PM

Kobe is a better basketball player. Some seem to forget that basketball consists offense AND defense.

Kobe also appears to be a better rapist and a better asshole, but that's beside the point.

Posted by Al | June 5, 2007 10:19 PM

This is the second year in a row where LeBron has been the most dominant player in the association.

Again, this ain't rocket science, folks.

Posted by Petey | June 5, 2007 10:20 PM

I only clicked through from the recent comments sidebar to see if you'd said "the association" yet, Petey. The wise and sagacious Al gets it exactly right.

Posted by ogged | June 5, 2007 10:22 PM

Out of curiosity, Petey... how many Cavs games did you see this season?

Posted by Freddie | June 5, 2007 10:22 PM

No, Lebron is never going to score 81 points. Never. Ever. Never ever ever ever ever.

Wouldn't you have said this about Kobe before he did it?

It's certainly highly unlikely.

Posted by John | June 5, 2007 10:24 PM

Kobe is still a far better defender than LeBron and has a much more reliable jumper.

How would you know? Certainly Kobe has been a very good defender in the past, but this year the Lakers' perimeter defense sucked, and Kobe was one of the reasons why. It wasn't inability, it was disinterest.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | June 5, 2007 10:27 PM

Put it this way, game 5, scoring on every possession, yeah I can see Kobe doing that. Game 6, recognizing that the D has adjusted and setting up Gibson for shot after shot, no way Kobe does that.

Kobe is a great scorer, not a great player. His version of involving his team-mates is dribbling around until there is 5 secinds left on the clock and seeing he has no shot passing it to someone, then glowering at them when they miss the shot that they weren't in position to take since they had spent 19 seconds trying to stay out of Kobe's way:-)

Posted by Eric | June 5, 2007 10:30 PM

"Out of curiosity, Petey... how many Cavs games did you see this season?"

Without checking the schedule, I guess around 7 or 8, give or take.

Posted by Petey | June 5, 2007 10:36 PM

"Wouldn't you have said this about Kobe before he did it?"

For the past couple of years, Kobe has been achieving scoring feats only accomplished only rarely in the history of the association. So, actually, seeing him doing something like that in a single game context wasn't all that surprising.

Posted by Petey | June 5, 2007 10:39 PM

"Without checking the schedule, I guess around 7 or 8, give or take."

Probably on the high side of that number, actually.

And that's regular season. (Though I skipped all of the 'zards series and the early part of the Nets series, so my playoff exposure is a bit deficient.)

Posted by Petey | June 5, 2007 10:41 PM

I agree with that other guy. LeBron makes his teammates better . . . Kobe doesn't.

The only reason Kobe won 3 championships is that he played with another guy who makes his teammates better . . . Shaq.

Posted by Matt C | June 5, 2007 10:44 PM

Lebron is better than Kobe was at 21. Lebron will be better at 28 than Kobe is today.

Posted by JP | June 5, 2007 10:45 PM

Lebron's a great player mind you, but Kobe despite not being as stellar on defense as usual is a far superior defensive player than Lebron and a better and more efficient scorer. Close your eyes and put Kobe with Big Z, Drew Gooden and Larry Hughes and tell me, that Kobe doesn't easily get that team through the East. I'm not saying that Kobe's better by a wide margin, but he is better.

Posted by Derrick | June 5, 2007 11:07 PM

Close your eyes and put Kobe with Big Z, Drew Gooden and Larry Hughes and tell me, that Kobe doesn't easily get that team through the East.

OK, I've got them closed. And nope, not seeing it. I'm seeing Kobe melt down faster against the Nets than 'Sheed did against the Cavs.

Posted by Doug H. | June 5, 2007 11:26 PM

"I agree with that other guy. LeBron makes his teammates better . . . Kobe doesn't."

This is ludicrous. Have you looked at the Lakers roster lately?

Lamar Odom is solid when he's healthy, but he is not as good at creating his shot as people seem to think. Beyond that you have...Luke Walton, Kwame Brown, Andrew Bynum, and Smush Parker. It's hard to make your teammates better when their baseline talent level is not very high.

Posted by Ashish George | June 6, 2007 12:24 AM

"Lamar Odom is solid when he's healthy, but he is not as good at creating his shot as people seem to think."

Y'see, that's what makes LeBron the most dominant player in the association. He doesn't need a single other player on the roster who can create his own shot to make the Finals.

Posted by Petey | June 6, 2007 12:29 AM

LeBron is physically gifted and can pass the ball, but it infuriates me that no one notes his awful habits of pushing off, cradling the ball, and walking all the way to the basket on his drives. Puh-leeze pay attention to the 2+ additional steps he takes, with no calls, throughout the games. With proper officiating, his assist-to-turnover ratio would be a godawful 1:2, or in that vicinity.

Posted by DC | June 6, 2007 12:31 AM

Larry Hughes is a good offensive player who can create his own shot and Ilgauskus is a good legitimate center. The Lakers don't have either of those things.

Posted by ogged | June 6, 2007 12:32 AM

"Larry Hughes is a good offensive player who can create his own shot"

As Mark Jackson would say, you're better than that, ogged.

Larry Hughes was in the bottom 4% of all players in the association in shooting efficiency this year, and that's playing with a guy who deforms the opposing team's defense enough to get you lots of easy shots.

Hughes is an easily above average defensive player when healthy, but has been a lousy scorer for his entire career. He's the rich man's Jared Jeffries.

Posted by Petey | June 6, 2007 12:42 AM

You might be right, Petey, I think I was thinking of a different player from back in Wizard days, along with the impression that Hughes is athletic enough to be a good offensive player. But I'm having trouble remembering him hitting a jumper. But! Ilgauskus is important.

Posted by ogged | June 6, 2007 12:46 AM

"Ilgauskus is important."

No doubt. He's a serviceable center, which is important, but he's certainly not elite.

If Kobe was on the Cavs instead of LeBron, they could've beaten the 'zards and the Nets, but they probably couldn't have beaten Detroit.

And they wouldn't have won 50 games, so they wouldn't have had that easy playoff path in the first place.

Aesthetically, Kobe is probably the best player in the association this year. But if you had access to god's Wins Produced numbers, LeBron would rate well above Kobe.

Posted by Petey | June 6, 2007 12:52 AM

Lebron will never score 81, for a simple reason: he weighs 255 pounds. His size makes it physically impossible for him to attack the basket with maximum intensity for 48 minutes straight. He needed an IV after about 15 minutes of attacking the basket singlehandedly in Game 5 against Detroit. The only way he could score 80+ is if he develops a much better post game that lets him score without such a huge expenditure of energy.

That energy factor has something to do with why Lebron is inconsistent on defense -- at his size it's very draining being a perimeter player guarding perimeter players. But Lebron has improved a lot on D, to the point that he is no longer a liability and can shut people down when he focuses and plays hard. The fact that Brown has coached the Cavs into being a good defensive team has helped here too. It's interesting that Kobe is a better defensive player individually than Lebron, but the Cavs are a better defensive team than the Lakers.

Hughes does suck on offense, to a degree that is hard to believe until you watch him consistently. Ilgauskas has flashes, but he cannot play complete games, and is pretty easy for defenses to adjust to when they decide to shut him down. Odom is a much better player.

Lebron's teammates love him, and he gets the most that is available from a very flawed team. There's no way the current Lakers team could have beaten Detroit.

Posted by mq | June 6, 2007 12:58 AM

I think I was thinking of a different player from back in Wizard days

Pretty much one year in his Wizard days. Not coincidentally, his contract year.

Posted by Antid Oto | June 6, 2007 1:17 AM

Odom is a much better player.

Thank you. I was in the process of stroking out before I saw that. Also, Kobe gambles too much on defense, which doesn't just diminish him as a defensive player, but actually hurts the teams defense.

I'm sticking with LeBron over Kobe for now, but only on the grounds that I'd rather have LeBron trying to get to the rim in the last four minutes. And because LeBron can stuff the stat sheet in other ways to a much greater extent than Kobe. IIRC, in that last game, teh Cavs outrebounded the Pistons by 20, and LeBron was one of the reasons why. But I'm not enamored of "makes other players better" arguments--they're too floppy, somehow.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | June 6, 2007 1:19 AM

"Makes other players better" is the single most important factor in the game of basketball. It's true that it's floppy -- that is precisely why basketball is not susceptible to endless boring stathead analysis like Matt tries to use. And thank God for that. Basketball is too high an art form to be analyzed and dissected by the kind of geeks who are ruining baseball commentary.

Posted by mq | June 6, 2007 1:24 AM

"And because LeBron can stuff the stat sheet in other ways to a much greater extent than Kobe."

No doubt.

Today's NYT piece kinda tells the nescient everything they need to know:

In the series against Detroit, he averaged 25.7 points, 9.2 rebounds and 8.5 assists, placing him in truly elite company. Only the Hall of Famers Oscar Robertson (in 1963), John Havlicek (1968) and Larry Bird (1986) had ever averaged at least 25 points, 9 rebounds and 8 assists in a conference finals.

There are more key passages than that one too. Worth reading in toto if you're trying to get a grasp on this.

And to the folks who think LeBron "motivates" his teammates, you're kinda stupid. LeBron's game makes his teammates lives much easier. That's why he's the most dominant player in the association.

Posted by Petey | June 6, 2007 1:27 AM

"Motivation" and "a game that frees up your teammates" are complementary goods, not competing ones. We're not talking locker room speeches here. The most important thing about Lebron as a motivator is that he doesn't pout or get angry when his teammates miss a huge percentage of the open shots he gets for them. He's been willing to take the blame for losses and failures, when he could legitimately point to his supporting cast. Put Jordan on this team and he'd have been jailed for homicide by now. Lebron's also been willing to go along with Brown's defense emphasis, which has been a good example for his teammates.

Also, Matt, you might want to look to last season, when Lebron's TS% was higher than Kobe's. Lebron took a big chunk of the regular season off this year, and only reverted to form in late April. I think it was a combination of the Olympics this summer and realizing "hey, in the NBA the regular season really *doesn't* matter".

Posted by mq | June 6, 2007 1:37 AM

"LeBron's game makes his teammates lives much easier."

TrueHoop has mentioned a fascinating story this week about how Daniel Gibson's peeps held him out of workouts during the draft so he'd fall to Cleveland.

He probably should have been a late first round pick, but Gibson's peeps recognized the career benefits that would accrue to being the only competent point guard on LeBron's crew. So they reached an understanding with Cleveland and held him out of the draft workouts.

Daniel Gibson's peeps are smaaaaaaaart.

That's the kind of story you'd hear about Shaquille back when he was the most dominant player in the association.

Posted by Petey | June 6, 2007 1:38 AM

And to the folks who think LeBron "motivates" his teammates, you're kinda stupid.

Notes from TNT’s Exclusive Coverage of the Eastern Conference Finals, Game #4-Tuesday, May 29, 2007

Gibson on playing with LeBron James:“(LeBron James) knows how to motivate you. When you’re out there on the floor he might miss a shot or two, he’s going to come back to you and he says, ‘I need you to knock it down for me.’ To have a great guy like that who has so much confidence in, and he doesn’t let the way he’s perceived and the way everybody loves him change the person he is, he’s always joking and having fun. To have a guy like that in your corner, it’s so much fun to play with him and you really look forward to doing big things for him.”

Posted by SoCalJustice | June 6, 2007 1:45 AM

"To have a guy like that in your corner, it’s so much fun to play with him"

Supportive players are a dime a dozen. A generous personality isn't what separates LeBron from the herd.

Jordan had a miserable personality, but he was great to play with because his game made his teammates jobs much easier.

Everyone likes to reduce sports to personality tics that they recognize from everyday life. But it's really more interesting than that.

Posted by Petey | June 6, 2007 1:52 AM

"A generous personality isn't what separates LeBron from the herd."

Well, I mean, obviously. Many of us have generous personalities, yet we would not be able to lead the Cavs to the NBA finals. But a massive talent gap like that between Lebron and his teammates is quite tricky to manage. I don't think it's a coincidence that Lebron is in the Finals four years out of high school, while it took MJ seven years in the league to get that far. And MJ was, I would argue, a better individual player than Lebron is now.

Posted by mq | June 6, 2007 1:59 AM

"I don't think it's a coincidence that Lebron is in the Finals four years out of high school, while it took MJ seven years in the league to get that far."

I don't think it's a coincidence either. But I don't think it has anything to do with personality.

Young MJ was much like present day Kobe - a great scorer, but not as good a basketball player as LeBron is today. Larry Bird and Magic Johnson were both in the Finals in their first couple of years in the league, and their games are both much more comparable to LeBron's than Young MJ's was.

It's simply hard to build a title winner around a dominant scoring guard. By nature of their games, they just don't improve the rest of their team enough. You have to go back at least three decades, (and perhaps more - that's as far as my association knowledge goes), to find a non-MJ title winner built around a dominant scoring guard.

Posted by Petey | June 6, 2007 2:10 AM

Well, we agree mostly, including about peoples tendency to reduce sports to personality dramas they recognize from their own life. But that doesn't mean such dramas don't exist (although admittedly they are usually consequences rather than causes of events on the field). I can imagine the Cavs having been pretty negatively affected if Lebron reacted to criticism by blaming his teammates. He's been quite protective of them.

Posted by mq | June 6, 2007 2:48 AM

MJ was a douchebag for a teammate. He use to punch guys out in practice and he got my ass cut during training camp.

I think Kobe is a prick but there were times over the past two seasons I thought he was on his way to becoming a team player. Then things would start to go bad, Walton would get hurt, Parker goes in the tank and he reverts back to evil Kobe. I don't think he will ever be a player that makes others better. The best the Lakers can hope for is to get someone to run the team, occassionally getting the role players shots, while letting Kobe be the prolific scorer he is. Kobe is on his way to being Andrian Dantley while LeBron his becoming a better Larry Bird.

Posted by Ron Rowan | June 6, 2007 3:55 AM

he is essentially just as good of a scorer as Kobe is. He's much more efficient because he shoots a higher field-goal percentage and scores in the flow of the offense.

I scored on a layup in my one appearance for my high school team--making me 1 for 1, and therefore a better scorer than Kobe, by this reasoning . . . (a layup, by definition, being "in the flow of the offense") . . .

Posted by rea | June 6, 2007 8:10 AM

Oh come on re early MJ. MJ had to go through two all time dynasties to get to the Finals. LeBron had to go through this pathetic East. Put the 80s Celtics or the Bad Boy Pistons in this East and LeBron could only get to the Finals by buying a ticket.

Posted by Al | June 6, 2007 9:01 AM

Put Jordan on this team and he'd have been jailed for homicide by now

Check those pre-championship Bulls teams again.

Posted by ogged | June 6, 2007 9:43 AM

If David Robinson could score 73 in a game, then Lebron can score 81. Sometimes the stars align just right, and magic happens. I agree that when Kobe did it, it was not nearly as surprising as if Lebron were to do it - after all, he had put up 60 in three quarters just a month or so before.

And I understand that this is a thread started about Kobe and Lebron, but when people start throwing out titles like "most dominant in the association," it seems like at least a passing mention ought to happen of the player who is the most dominant in the association. A guy who led his team out of the conference that didn't suck. A guy who dominates the game on both sides of the floor. A guy who has won a finals mvp, had every player on that championship team leave, and then won another finals mvp, which is something no other player has done (though in fairness, the finals mvp didn't exist in Bill Russell's day.)

Posted by Curtis | June 6, 2007 10:25 AM

Yes, the wise and sagacious ogged is exactly right. Look at the 87 Bulls for example. Their second best scorer was Charles Oakley. It is perhaps the worst surrounding cast I've ever seen. And yet Jordan still led them to a 40-42 record.

Posted by Al | June 6, 2007 10:26 AM

Al is right again and again. If LeBron doesn't play in a ludicrously weak conference, he's nowhere with this team.

Posted by Steve | June 6, 2007 11:43 AM

re dominance,it's not just that lebron does what he does in the very weak east, it's that duncan's done what he's done in the west, going up against insane competition. put duncan in the east and he gets his team to the finals just about every year.

which brings me back to lebron/kobe: alternate universe speculation is kinda silly, but i think people make too little of how strong the west has been, what a grind it is to get through it. this should weigh strongly in kobe's favor (though i still think lebron's better and has worse team mates, not better).

Posted by dj superflat | June 6, 2007 12:13 PM

Kobe is on his way to being Andrian Dantley while LeBron his becoming a better Larry Bird.

Yes, except that Larry Bird won multiple fucking titles. Why do all of you intelligent people insist on partaking in this ludicrous hype? Yes, Lebron is an incredible talent who could be known as one of the all time greats. But so far in his career, he's accomplished jack. Bill Russel put up a 30 and 40 (yes, forty rebounds) in game 7 of the NBA Finals. That's a performance that deserves to be debated as one of the best ever. 48 points in a double overtime game against an overrated team in perhaps the worst conference in the last 20 years does not.

Posted by Freddie | June 6, 2007 12:46 PM

Just to put in my 2 cents, LeBron is the better player, not the better scorer and his supporting cast isn't as good as Kobe's.

And Bill Russell was the greatest winner ever.

Posted by SteveH | June 6, 2007 1:05 PM

Freddie's comment is the prototype of the "Lebron was hyped, therefore I hate him" response. It's kind of silly -- I mean, Lebron was hyped, but he *lived up to the hype*. Being in the finals by 22 is like, sort of rare.

As for the Eastern conference being so terrible...well, sure the record is worse, but check who won the Finals three out of the last four years.

Posted by mq | June 6, 2007 2:13 PM

Yes, except that Larry Bird won multiple fucking titles.

Bird and HOF'ers Parish (debatable) and McHale (not) and previous Finals MVP Dennis Johnson won multiple titles.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | June 6, 2007 2:27 PM

I agree with freddie here; come on, people--the reason the 48 are so insanely overhyped is that LeBron had been FAILING TO LIVE UP TO EXPECTATIONS for much of the regular season and playoffs...."greatest ever" discussions before the records are in the books are just silly...

Posted by nick | June 6, 2007 3:57 PM

Freddie's comment is the prototype of the "Lebron was hyped, therefore I hate him" response. It's kind of silly -- I mean, Lebron was hyped, but he *lived up to the hype*. Being in the finals by 22 is like, sort of rare.

Ah, but you see, I can't lose this argument, because in trying to attack my argument, you produce precisely the kind of hype you say Lebron is immune to.

And by the way, I never said I hate Lebron, I don't. I hate the absurd, over the top, self-parody kind of hype that he has accrued. He has not won a title. He's beaten a good but beatable Detroit team, a bad Nets team, and a Wizard team that is certainly in the conversation for worst playoff team of all time.

Posted by Freddie | June 6, 2007 4:06 PM

Jesus, he's never accomplished anything? Dude average, what, 31, 7 and 7 last year, at age 21? He's taken his team to the Finals pretty much single-handedly at age 22? Back the good old days, most guys were still in college at that age. Yeah, if that's all that he ever accomplishes, it'll be a disappointment, but Christ, ease up a little. He's been one of the top 5 players in the league since the day his second season started, and I'd say he's made it to #1 now. He's the most hyped player ever, and from day 1, he's been better than the hype.

Oh, and he's better than Kobe. He's better than Kobe right now, and Kobe is at his peak, while LeBron should just be entering his prime over the next few years.

Posted by too many steves | June 6, 2007 4:47 PM

And by the way, I never said I hate Lebron, I don't. I hate the absurd, over the top, self-parody kind of hype that he has accrued. He has not won a title.

I don't buy this at all. While the hype might be obnoxious, it comes with a price: if LeBron fails to win multiple titles, people will call his career a disapointment. Given the age and media environment we live in, the hype surrounding LeBron is proportional to what he has achieved so far in his young career. But the context is clear insofar as people see his performance as part of an upward tradjectory. A failure to follow through with championships will result in the ugly side of modern fame, namely, viscious attacks on his reputation and abilities. We love our celebrities, until we hate them.

LeBron is huge because he is living up to the hype so far. Expectations adjust quickly, however. The 48-point game alone changed things. It's multiple championships or bust for Mr. James.

Posted by owenz | June 6, 2007 4:53 PM

I love the intensity of arguing who is better among players of this caliber. It's like arguing between a Ferrari and a Lamborghini. You take either one you can get your hands on, and if you for some reason have the choice between both of them, then you can't make a wrong decision.

That said, I think that anyone who has watched both players will note that Kobe is unquestionably a better shooter, a better defender, and is more refined in his play. But LeBron is _young_. Michael Jordan also wasn't nearly the shooter in his early days that he became in the 90's. But he fanatically worked at improving every aspect of his game that could be improved, and won all those championships and dominated the league in ways he didn't do when he was younger and just winning scoring titles.

Kobe's shown that fanatical devotion to improvement and winning, though we'll need to see him on a team that can contend again to evaluate his ability as a mature player. LeBron has the potential to probably be even better than Kobe, but we'll all see how much he pushes himself to improve over the coming years.

Posted by Will Hutchinson | June 6, 2007 4:53 PM

"And I understand that this is a thread started about Kobe and Lebron, but when people start throwing out titles like "most dominant in the association," it seems like at least a passing mention ought to happen of the player who is the most dominant in the association."

Timmy is obviously in the conversation. As is Steve Nash.

But LeBron has still been the the dominant player in the association for the past two years.

Posted by Petey | June 6, 2007 4:55 PM

Bill Simmons has dropped some knowledge, especially for all the people who keep talking about how Lebron is only 22:

The phenomenon was in full swing after 48 Special -- again, a magnificent event, but one that paled in comparison with a 20-year-old Magic jumping center in Philly, slapping up a 42/15/7, playing five positions and leading the Lakers to the 1980 title. Imagine if something like that happened today? There would be pieces of Skip Bayless' head scattered across the entire city of Bristol.

Posted by Freddie | June 6, 2007 5:58 PM

OK, so LeBron isn't as good as Magic Johnson. Neither is anyone who has ever played basketball, with the exception of Jordan, Russell, Wilt, and maybe Bird.

Anyway, that Simmons column was stupid. He says in there that people have forgotten Larry and Magic, or people say they couldn't hack it in today's NBA. Who says that? That's ridiculous. Everyone who has anything to say about the NBA says Larry and Magic are the pinnacle of greatest, LeBron hopes to someday be half as awesome, etc, etc.

Posted by too many steves | June 6, 2007 7:00 PM

The only thing worse than argument by assertion is argument by the same fucking assertion over and over again.

Posted by Steve | June 6, 2007 7:15 PM

simmons's column is spot on -- lebron's 48 and kobe's 81 don't even come close to magic's finals game (20? at center?).

Posted by dj superflat | June 6, 2007 7:25 PM

Well, Magic's game is a little unfair as a point of comparison. You take a rookie PG, move him to center to replace one of the best centers in NBA history and he leads his team to an NBA title clinching victory with a 42/15/7... I think that's the most impressive performance of all time.

I don't want to get into the overall Kobe v LeBron debate, b/c its too nebulous, but Kobe is obviously a better scorer right now. I'm very interested in this theory that LeBron is a little too heavy to attack the basket all game long or play intense defense at the same time... I had never thought about it that way. In my mind the problem was that he needed a better jump shot, both mid-range and long-range. If he does he could be better than Kobe and much more likely to go for 81. (it would also address the weight issue) 81 requires getting on a hot shooting streak. There's just no other way that's possible as a guard/forward.

Posted by mpowell | June 6, 2007 7:38 PM

"Well, Magic's game is a little unfair as a point of comparison."

It's a perfectly fair comparison. It just doesn't have anything to do with comparing LeBron to Kobe or to anyone else currently playing.

Posted by Petey | June 6, 2007 7:45 PM

i tried, i really tried, to ignore this whole discussion: it's the kind of thing that leaves me completely cold, but i guess i couldn't resist seeing what people had to say.

and yes, it's the kind of discussion that leaves me cold, but i'm commenting because i just wanted to agree with mpowell: in my estimation, like mpowell's (and, for that matter, bob ryan's) that game 6 performance by earvin was the single greatest individual performance ever.

and now, back to kobe/lebron....

Posted by howard | June 6, 2007 7:52 PM

"In my mind the problem was that he needed a better jump shot, both mid-range and long-range. If he does he could be better than Kobe and much more likely to go for 81."

As anyone with a knowledge of the game knows, LeBron is already a better player than Kobe. However, that doesn't make him a better scorer.

LeBron is unlikely to ever go for 81 for the same reason Magic Johnson and Larry Bird never got 81. It takes being a pure scorer to have a game like that.

If you leave out the silly last game of the season freak shows David Robinson and David Thompson had to win scoring titles, here's the list of folks who've gone for 65 or more:

- Wilt Chamberlain
- Kobe Bryant
- Elgin Baylor
- Michael Jordan
- Pete Maravich

No matter how good LeBron is or becomes, he still doesn't belong on that list. He's not a pure scorer like those guys.

Posted by Petey | June 6, 2007 8:03 PM

Lebron's size is a big X factor in his game. There's never been a perimeter player within 20 pounds of his his size. Furthermore, there's never been a player weighing 250+ pounds who averaged as many minutes as he has over a multi-year period. The Cavs never let him sit. He is fighting a constant, season-long battle with exhaustion, and he fights it every game as well. This is why he visibly takes possessions off, which leads to criticisms (from e.g. Simmons) for slacking.

This is one reason I get pissed when I hear people saying Lebron hasn't earned anything, etc. etc. He's put out an incredible level of sheer physical effort over the last few years.

He's only been able to do this because he's so young. As he gets older, he will have to take his game more inside in order to lessen the strain of constantly penetrating and handling on the perimeter. I really wonder how long his knees will hold up.

Posted by mq | June 6, 2007 8:10 PM

I seem to recall reading that Magic played more power forward than point guard his rookie year. His Finals game was still remarkable, but not because he had shifted from point guard to center.

As regards Kobe v. LeBron, I note that Kobe has always had a better shot than Shaq and (IIRC) was always better regarded on defense. I'd still take Shaq in his prime over Kobe in his prime. Kobe is much more technically adept than LeBron at many, many things, but LeBron just has options on offense that Kobe doesn't. (The reverse is obviously also true, but the argument is that you'd prefer LeBron's options to Kobe's options.)

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | June 6, 2007 8:12 PM

OK, when I said there's never been a perimeter player within 20 pounds of Lebron's size, that was in retrospect a little hyperbolic -- Ron Artest (a very similar physical specimen) is one, and the very late Magic Johnson had ballooned up there. But they both spent significant time in the post, didn't / don't have the same kind of penetrating game.

Posted by mq | June 6, 2007 8:14 PM

somecallmetim, i'm not going to say that it's impossible that earvin played some 4 in his rookie year, although i didn't recall it myself (i mean, for example, they could have had kareem-earvin-wilkes-nixon-cooper on the court at the same time, and i suppose in that situation, earvin could have been the 4), but i did just take a quick look, and the 3 primary guys who played the 4 and 5 that year (kareem, chones, and spencer haywood, and no, i didn't remember that earvin and spencer were teammates!) averaged 86 minutes a game among 'em, so that doesn't leave a lot of minutes that earvin played the 4.

so i would say that his game 6 performance was both highly impressive on its own merits but also because at the most critical game of the season, he was playing a role that at most he'd played for a few minutes (sort of like the year that phil ford and otis birdsong got hurt and the kansas city starting guards in the playoffs became ernie grunfeld and scott wedman, and they did quite well).

Posted by howard | June 6, 2007 8:27 PM

Holy crap! A Scott Wedman reference.

It is telling that we are some 80 comments into a thread about the best player in the league without a mention of reigning MVP.

Posted by Curtis | June 7, 2007 10:59 AM

Petey- My point was that Magic's game was the very best ever. Its fair as a point of comparison if you're going to try and claim LeBron Jame's game was the best ever. But nobody has claimed that as far as I know.

People are claiming it was one of the all-time great playoffs performances. Certainly, nobody this post season has had a better game. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any comparable games in the last year or two, though some from Dirk and Wade last year come close. If people want to say its one of the 10 best ever, 20 best ever or 30 best ever, well, I think its debatable. But pointing out that it doesn't match the best ever performance just isn't fair. Instead, compare it to MJ 63 point game, say. Sure he scored more points in less time, but did he score 29 of the last 30? No. Did he fill out the stat sheet as well as LeBron? I don't actually know. Was he as young as LeBron? No. That is a much fairer point of comparison.

Posted by mpowell | June 7, 2007 1:07 PM

Who cares about the youth? That, it seems to me, is like giving extra points to Iverson because he's small, or to McHale becaue he was relatively unathletic. The performance stands on its own.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | June 7, 2007 1:13 PM

Actually, after checking, Jordan's 63 point game was a 135-131 point 2OT loss. And though he was older, it was only his 2nd year in the NBA, so maybe that's a wash. But the 63 in a 131 point losing effort is still comparable to 48 in a 109 point winning effort, in my mind.

Posted by mpowell | June 7, 2007 1:14 PM

"Who cares about the youth?"

Good question SCMT. I think there are two potential categories. Most impressive performance and simply best performance. I think in the former youth matters. Being younger makes the accomplishment more impressive and in a greater way than just being short or small b/c it captures our imagination as to what is possible for the player as he grows older and matures.

Posted by mpowell | June 7, 2007 1:30 PM

A Hollinger stat for the Kobe Haters:

Playoff Player Efficiency Rating Among Shooting Guards:

Kobe Bryant 24.23

Josh Howard 22.48

Manu Ginobli 21.79

Posted by Justin | June 7, 2007 1:52 PM