Kobe v. LeBron

My rebuttals to my opponent's arguments. In the first round, my opponent argues that the "voting committees feel the same way about James" with regards to MVP voting. While LeBron does lead Kobe in MVPs, I will argue that Kobe Bryant was robbed at least once by the MVP voting committee. In 2006 Bryant had a monstrous season averaging over 35 ppg, go on a four game streak scoring over 50 on all four, having a legendary 81 point game, and single highhandedly outscoring the Dallas Mavericks (the western champs that year) 62-61 in three quarters, yet Nash wins the MVP (for the second time). Even Bill Simmons (author of the New York Times Bestseller The Book of Basketball) argued that Kobe was robbed that season and Simmons is widely known as a "Boston Homer/Kobe Hater". Kobe was mainly robbed because of his image. He was only three years removed from the rape trial. NBA fans and Stern (who tries to keep a wholesome image of the NBA), were uneasy of seeing Kobe Bryant as the MVP. In theory, Bryant should have at least 2 NBA MVPs matching LeBron. The media has tremendous influence in the NBA. Because of the NBA media, Kobe was robbed in '06, Hakim was robbed in '95 (everyone loved Robinson), Jordan was robbed in '93 (who doesn't like Charles Barkley), and Jordan was robbed again in '97 (why hasn't Karl Malone won it yet?) Most of the deserving MVP players were either facing, "I'm tired of him getting the MVP" or "I just plain don't like this guy." Bryant was no different, and because of LeBron's Decision, James might face the same in the future. The media is very influential and unfair. Since the deficit is only one, it is not sufficient to compare these two on season MVPs (unlike comparing Jordan to Bryant or James where the deficit is four and three respectively). My opponent also argues that James has never had a supporting cast and is almost correct. He cites that Kobe has demanded a trade in '07, and he is correct. However, the difference is this, James left a 60+ win team to join another alpha dog (Dwyane Wade who could be argued as the leader of Miami). The Cleveland Cavaliers were one position away from an NBA championship (a dominant low post scorer). LeBron could have had that low post scorer in New York for example and still have kept his reputation as an alpha dog. When Kobe requested a trade, he had a much worse supporting cast than James. The choices Kobe was looking for were the L.A. Clippers and Chicago Bulls. The difference compared to LeBron, there was no other alpha dog who could wrest leadership duties from Bryant in either of those teams. Bryant was looking to win on his terms as the alpha dog not joining up with Allen Iverson, Vince Carter, or Tracy McGrady. Additionally, my opponent does mention Bryant faltering in the '06 NBA Playoffs against the Suns. In Bryant's defense he proved everyone that their opinions meant diddly squat of him being a ball hog. A little Rick Barry-esque, I know but both him and Ricky Barry proved a point ("I know what I'm doing now shut up and let me play my style.") Kobe had to take over, but showed everyone "See, this is what happens when you have scrubs on your team and want me to share." And a young Bryant was notorious for doing things like this, but he always sent a message. Another example, the reason Pau Gasol is on the Lakers is because Kobe complained making Mitch Kupchak to scramble for a low post scorer. Had LeBron complained about his cast and requested for help, Cleveland would not have thought twice about picking up Amar'e Stoudemire (which they were on the verge of doing) LeBron was basically passive aggressive about what Cleveland was doing, and the idiocy of the Cleveland front desk allowed him to walk out. Back to Kobe's ball hogging, in the mid 1980s nobody told Michael Jordan to share the ball with Kyle Macy, Orlando Wooleridge, a washed up George Gervin, and other scrub team mates, yet Bryant was supposed to share with Kwame Brown (arguably the bust of this past decade), Smush Parker (no longer in the league), Luke Walton (better known for his defense), and Vladmir Radmonovic (who couldn't guard a child)? MJ is glorified for dominating the game against the Celtics in 86 on the individual level (scoring 61 and 63 first two games), even though he was swept by the Celtics and no one had a problem with it, but when Bryant attempts to outscore the Suns (which was one of the few ways to beat them at the time), everyone pouts and demands Kobe to share. Kobe agreed with Phil Jackson to share the ball (a strategy that worked for Game 4 of that series) and the end result: a loss. Had Kobe erupted for 45 points or more (which he could've done), the outcome may have been different. This goes with the alpha dog turf. I would rather have a prime Kobe ball hogging and winning the game than distribute the ball. The same could be said about Chamberlain, Jordan, Kareem, Julius Erving, but when it comes Bryant, he's selfish. It's such a double standard and Bryant exposed it in this series even though they lost (they were never going to win the championship that year anyway). My opponent also argues that James brought his best in Game 7 of the NBA Eastern Conference Semifinals against the Celtics, but does not recognize that there was no necessity for a Game 7 in the first place. In Game 1, the Cleveland Cavaliers lost by four points and LeBron had a career low 12 points (which is unfathomable for a player of his caliber). He did not pick it up until Game 3 (when he scored 21). At least Bryant had a great start against the Suns and ultimately failed because of his supporting cast and public criticism. James could have single handedly won Game 1 or 2 and maybe not even reach a Game 7. Zydrunas Ilagauskas outscored James (22) in that game (source 3). My opponent also claims that Bryant is slowing down this season at his age. Bryant is averaging 25.1 ppg, 4.5 apg, and 5.0 rpg which is hardly slowing down. With all those miles and injuries (many) on Bryant, it is strange that he isn't averaging 15 ppg, 6 apg, and 2 rpg. This goes back to his fundamentals. Bryant is surviving on his fundamentals much like Jordan was in the last couple of seasons of his career as a Bull. James is one dimensional with regards to athleticism. Besides his passing, James' fundamentals are not as sharp as Bryant's. An example of this, even through injuries, Kobe still plays as if there are no problems. When James injured his elbow back in May, he made a fuss about it by shooting free throws left handed (a "look at my elbow" display against the Celtics), but then goes on by attacking the rim and shooting jump shots. Bryant is a predator that refuses to show weakness, while James places a spotlight on it . And final rebuttal, while Kobe was not merely a sidekick to Shaq the first three championships and seasons afterward. A scoring average of 21.1 ppg (2000), 29 ppg (2001), 26.6 ppg (2002), 32.1 ppg (2003) and 24.5 ppg (2004) in the playoffs are not sidekick numbers. Shaq beat up on weak eastern teams while Bryant took care of business in the Western Conference Finals (which were tougher than the Finals themselves). Game 4 of 2000 Finals, Shaq fouls out in OT and who takes over and saves the game? None other than the Black Mamba scoring 28. Even Shaq campaigned that Kobe deserved the '02 NBA MVP, and Kobe had become the best player in the league by that season. Without Bryant, Shaq would not have three of the four rings he has. His next best team mates were Wade and the NBA referees of the 2006 NBA Finals. This was a great debate, and thank you for agreeing to debate with me on this. I look forward to any future debates with you again, ASB. I'll check the comments if you want me to clarify anything. http://sports.espn.go.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.basketball-reference.com...