There are a few sub-issues in this non-debate debate that I wanted to address. First, it is not true (though I wish it were) that only a few misguided souls have jumped on the “Kobe is Jordan” bandwagon. I’ve heard variations on this theme from supposedly intelligent commentators like Dan Patrick, Rick Reilly (who’s always had some kind of weird vendetta against Jordan), Colin Blowhard, er, Cowherd, Norman Chad, Sam Smith; from ex-players other than the frontally lobotomized Mark Jackson, including Kenny Smith, Kenny Anderson, Brent Barry and John Salley. So, this idiocy is not limited to the lunatic fringe (or, rather, the lunatic fringe is far more populous than we thought.)

These people must be shamed, ridiculed and scorned. There has not been nearly enough public humiliation of the Kobe-philes. Their opinions on any basketball related matters can never be taken seriously. They’re like the kooks who think Neil Armstrong landed on a sound stage; they’re like the people who insist 9/11 was an inside job; they’re like someone who insists that Shelly Smith is hotter than Erin Andrews. They have proven themselves to be in a persistent vegetative state and their opinions are to be given the consideration due to those with no discernible brain activity. If Mark Jackson ever utters the words “Jordan” and “Kobe” in the same sentence again, he should be repeatedly tazered on live television and then forced to do the rest of the broadcast with one of Charles Oakley’s rancid jock straps wadded in his mouth. (By the way, I’m sure everyone remembers the famous Jordan dunk at MSG where he gets out on the break, takes the lob from Sam Vincent and crams it two handed on, yes, Mark Jackson’s head while all the Knicks fans in the back ground leap for joy at what they’ve just seen. My theory is that for some players-turned-commentators like Jackson, who Jordan routinely tortured and emasculated on the court, opining that Kobe is as good as his Airness is a form of petty revenge.)

However, arguably worse than the Kobe koolaid brigade — and what vexes me greatly enough to make me rend my garments — are the purported Jordan defenders who offer this kind of lukewarm, retch-inducing support: “Well, Jordan is still the greatest player ever because of his leadership and intangibles, but Kobe is a better shooter and is more gifted/talented/athletic.”

Huh?! Are you %$&! insane! Wrong! Wrong! A thousand times Wrong!

The early Jordan (‘84-’93) — aka ‘Come Fly with Me’ Mike — was the most explosive, vicious attacker of the rim in the history of the league. Kobe’s athletic ability — in terms of both levitation, burst off the dribble and lateral quickness — are a B minus Jordan. Which is why he found himself taking and mostly bricking fall away 19 footers against the Celtics defense. Look, taking nothing away from Paul Pierce’s valiant defensive efforts on Kobe, but the ‘Truth’ would have had as much chance of impeding vintage Jordan as a tree sloth impaled on a cement post. One shudders to think what kind of stupefying offensive binges Jordan would have gone on in a no-hand check league.

And let’s dispense with this related lie from the Land of the Stupids that Kobe is the better shooter. The relevant shooting percentages alone show this to be patently absurd (from 87 thru 92 — Jordan averaged an astonishing 52% from the field, against defenses that were permitted to inflict blunt head trauma on those foolish enough to venture into the paint). But the stats don’t get at the real difference. If Kobe and Jordan stood in an empty gym and had a three point shooting contest, I have little doubt that Kobe would win. But shooting at the NBA level is not primarily about “range” or winning at “horse” — it’s about being able to get the shots you want while under extreme duress. David Halberstam, in his marvelous book about Jordan, commented that while Jordan was not as skilled a pure shooter as bombers like Reggie Miller and Larry Bird, Jordan was perhaps the best shooter under “combat conditions.” That’s exactly right: when facing rugged, play off defenses geared entirely to stop him, Jordan was still able to get any shot he wanted. Kobe, as we’ve just witnessed, lacks the ability to impose his offensive will on a great, cohesive defense.

I’m not a Kobe hater. He may very well go down as the second best shooting guard to ever play. But these foolish, baseless comparisons with the G.O.A.T really must stop.

Because we all know that Harold Minor was the true Air Apparent.

Why? Because the “Old Man Joy” post before it said everything that needed to be said on this whole issue, Joe nailed it. Kobe was horrible in Game 6, and one lesson to draw then from Game 6 was that Kobe does not equal MJ–it’s not even a discussion point.

And then two days later–we get a blog post comparing Kobe to MJ using a bunch of different statistical metrics. WTF? While he’s at it, maybe Joe can break out statistics to prove other truths that everybody knows already. Is Paul Pierce really better than Vlad Radmanovich? Joe?

Mike is flat out awesome’er.

There may be aspects of their games where Kobe is better, but come on. Overall? They’re pretty easy to compare, and Jordan was… well, Jordan. I find it much more difficult to compare Jordan to players like Magic or Wilt, where their roles were vastly different.

Tim Duncan is one of the ten best Power Forwards in the game, all time.

Shaq is one of the ten best Centers in the game, all time.

It’s a bit hard to compare them, in my opinion, as they play positions that often are called interchangeable, but are quite different.

Has Duncan “Gotten the better of Shaq” on many occasions? Undoubtedly. Duncan is also 8 years younger than Shaq. Think that might have something to do with it?

Also, in his absolute prime years, Shaq DESTROYED Tim Duncan in the playoffs.

Hakeem Olajuwon is possibly better than Shaq, but they played like 12 years apart. Not really an apt comparison.

Que?

It’s a LOT of idiot fans too. Love the work Joe, hopefully this argument is now forever closed.

My Nazi work firewall guys have now blocked all ESPN chat archives, otherwise I’d search for the John Hollinger chat in which he absolutely DESTROYED the ‘argument’ in two simple paragraphs by using a few statistics.