Sorry, but LeBron doesn't even come close to Kobe. I don't think it's fair to use the last five minutes to count as clutch time. It should be closer to the two minute mark. And what did the writer mean when he said "And career-wise, James has the edge as well."
ESPN desperately trying to add to the drama for the Christmas day showdown. The comparison's laughable: Bryant has over 50 game-winners in his career, and the hardware to back it up. Wait, how did LBJ perform in the "clutch" last season when it mattered most? 'Nuff said.
Yes, I've heard. Kills men by the hundreds. And if HE were here, he'd consume the English with fireballs from his eyes, and bolts of lightning from his arse. http://www.dolem.com/lakers/kobe/ Better than 6-24 shooting, that's for sure. Agreed.
In other news, basketball is a team sport. Go ahead and tune into a Cavs game sometime to see how awesome Lebron's supporting cast is/was. Bbbbutt they'll make the playoffs! --YaoZow
it's pretty hard to use statistics when kobe is consistently going against teams with 10+ wins a season more.
That was actually a pretty nice article. It's a shame that most of the posters in this thread are unable to appreciate it because it's been pounded into their heads that Kobe must be better because we see him hit all these game winners (even though that's mentioned in the article) or because he has more championships in a team sport. The only legitimate complaint with the analysis that has been posted in this thread is from trustme (post #3), who thinks that there should be a tighter definition of crunch time. That's fair enough, but I really doubt it would change the results by much. I've been saying this for a couple years now, but the bottom line is that Kobe hits a lot of game winners in games where there shouldn't even be an opportunity for game winners. That shows up in his negative +/- stat. Because Kobe tends to go one-on-one and take contested jumpers at the end of close games, his team rarely pulls away and sometimes even gives up small leads, giving Kobe the chance to hit game winners. Having said that, a 37.6 PER in the last five minutes is still really impressive. However, Lebron plays so amazingly well in the final five minutes of games that his team just pulls away more often, and he's had far fewer opportunities for game winners. He's also been very willing throughout his career to set up teammates for those game winners, something for which he used to be criticized widely.
The table only shows data for last season. I think the author means that James' numbers are better than Bryant's even if you look at their entire careers instead of just last season.
What about his 15 rebounds? When do you hear him grabbing that many rebounds in a regular season game? Never? So it shows how he contributed in other ways. And it was a Finals game, you don't think he was the main defensive focus?
Well in the elimination game against the Celtics where Lebron supposedly quit, he had more points than Kobe did in that game 7 (27 vs. 23), shot better (38% vs. 25%), had more rebounds (19 vs. 15) and more assists (10 vs. 2) and yet it's still held against him that his team lost. It's not even like Kobe played poorly in Game 7 then started making clutch plays at the end. In the last five minutes of the game, he was 0-2 from the field, 3-4 from the free throw line and had two rebounds. Kobe's greatest clutch "ability" in that game was having Pau Gasol for a teammate.
every year they try to say stats show lebrons better, and if lebron had a better team he would be even better in advance statistics bc he wouldnt have to deal with all the defensive attentin and would have more room like kobe does in La well here he is in miami with 2 other top 10 players from last year, and whose per is better(yes stats will go down, but per is supposed to go beynd htat) espn rarely mentioned this year that kobe has a better per than lebron this year
Kobe is playing with the same teammates, coaching staff, and system he's been in for the last several years. Lebron is playing with all new teammates, new coaches, and a new system. On top of that, Kobe has started the year really well, posting his best PER in four years. Much has been made of Lebron's struggles to adapt to playing with Wade and he's posting the worst PER since his rookie season. Having said all that, Kobe is still barely leading Lebron in PER, by just 0.5. Let's wait and see how things look at the end of the year.
Well, Lebron does have the size advantage over Kobe, and he's known to play inside the paint much more than Kobe. He was also much younger. If you remember those years when the Western Finals were more interesting than the NBA Finals, Kobe was the culprit that lead LA to their championships. People say Shaq, but Shaq was just on the receiving end of Kobe's assists.
The rings argument when comparing these two is absolutely stupid. If LeBron started his career in L.A. like Kobe did he would have rings. If Kobe started his career in Cleveland he most likely would not have any rings. Two different situations and it is mind boggling when people bring up the ring argument when comparing the two. Yes I understand that Championships are everything but Kobe was drafted on a good team with good vets. LeBron was drafted to a garbage franchise that he had to bring up from the dirt.
How is the comparison stupid? Do you think those Lakers championships team could have done it without Kobe? Remember that season when they were down by 15 at the half against Portland in the Conference Finals? It was Kobe who made that passed where Shaq made that dunked and had that excited look as he ran toward his team. They usually show this clip on NBA. I'm not sure if you know what I'm talking about. Besides Shaq, who were good on those LA championship teams? Rick Fox? Derek Fischer? If Kobe had played on the East, he would have had the same impact, maybe not as many rings, but still able to make a team much better.
