The resume of Kobe Bryant speaks for itself.
Twenty seasons. Career averages of 25/5.2/4.7. Five championships. Third on the all-time scoring list. Two Finals MVPs. Eighteen All-Star games. Four All-Star game MVPs. A regular season MVP. Two scoring titles. Eleven times he was first team All-NBA and nine times he was first team all-defense.
In an era where advanced metrics and mathematical equations have taken over as the primary determining factor of a player's talent level, Bryant's greatness has either been overlooked, dismissed, and disrespected. Maybe all three.
He led the league in scoring twice, and - as previously mentioned - is third all-time in scoring. He is indisputedly one of the best scorers the league has ever seen. The label among today's ignorant fans is that he never passed the ball, yet he averaged basically 5 assists for his career, including four seasons of 6 or more per game. The other knock on him is field goal percentage, but his highest ever in a regular season (46.9%) was at the age of 23, in 2001-02.
Today's basketball coverage (sports coverage in general) is rampant with knee jerk reactions, "hot takes", and meaningless rankings that are thrown out just to give the hoard of sports television shows something to discuss to fill time. Whichever role they play, they do accomplish their goal.
They get people talking.
The latest - from NBA TV - is All Decade teams from the 2010s. The NFL does this every ten years, and this is the first that i have heard of the NBA broaching the idea and coming up with one. The first team is who you would expect - Stephen Curry, Kevin Durant, LeBron James, Kawhi Leonard, James Harden. Those are easy choices that people would be hard pressed to disagree with. After that, is where the Kobe discussion comes in.
Bryant is not on the second team - Chris Paul, Anthony Davis, Russell Westbrook, Carmelo Anthony, and Blake Griffin have those spots. Rather, he's on the third team, with Dwyane Wade, Lamarcus Aldridge, Giannis Antetokounmpo, and Paul George. Soon to be 41, Bryant played just six of his twenty seasons in the decade, and naturally didn't build most of his resume in those years, like the others did.
But Bryant was not without success from 2016-2016, which should put him above guys like Anthony and Griffin, for instance. In June of 2010, he won his fifth championship, and the second of his Finals MVPs. From 2010-2013 - the latter year the year that he tore his Achilles - his averages were as follows:
2010-2011: 25.3 points, 5.1 rebounds, 4.7 assists, 45% shooting.
2011-2012: 27.9 points, 5.4 rebounds, 4.6 assists, 43% shooting.
2012-2013: 27.3 points, 5.6 rebounds, 6.0 assists, 46% shooting.
Anthony won a scoring title, and was an All-Star from 2010-2017. Bryant had three All-NBA first team nods, was an All-Star through that same span, and made the All-Defensive first team in 2010 and 2011. Add in winning a ring in 2010, and you have all the evidence you need to bump him up to the second team.
Back in the day, before analytics took over, you would watch a player on the court, and judge him off of that. How hard does he play? Does he make the right play? How does he do when he goes up against top level competition? Now, people make it all about percentages. It's examining a sheet of paper before examining what happens on the court. It's made guys like Bryant get disrespected - in lists such as this - and i am sure will eventually devalue the greatness of Allen Iverson, for example. Even though Iverson, at barely 6 feet and 170 pounds, led the league in scoring and was an MVP.
In all likelihood, Bryant was probably a throw in in these rankings, to appease the older fan and just to include a guy that isn't current. Because then, where is Tim Duncan (championship, four All-Star games, 1 first team All-NBA, 3 second team All-Defense from 2010-16)? Bryant's fellow '90s/2000s guy - at age 38 in the 2014 Finals - averaged 15.4 points and 10 rebounds, winning his last of five championship rings.
The younger crowd is beginning to dismiss the greatness of stars past. It is easier (and more lazy) to just plug in the most recent guys that are fresh in the minds of fans, rather than dig deeper and find better places for guys like Bryant (or Duncan, for that matter). Was Bryant even a consideration for a higher selection? Was Duncan ever considered?
Who knows. But the fact is, that Bryant - given his body of work for 6 of those 10 years - deserves higher than a third team all 2010s.
Comments