http://www.surveymagnet.com/2010/07/what-does-kobe-bryant-have-to-do-eclipse-jordan-as-the-greatest/

Come join the discussion.

Also, nobody has said that MJ could've won without help. But going back to that 63 point game, his team as a whole was FAR inferior to that Celtics team, and a far cry from the championship-caliber Bulls teams. And in 1989 when he made "The Shot", the Cavaliers were a much better team as well, and yet MJ made enough of a difference for the upset. Regarding Detroit in the 1990 eastern conference finals, the Bulls did lose in 7 games, but neither team was able to win on the road. Those guys really did physically beat up on MJ though, and judging from the times when I've seen Kobe get played more physical (like when he's been guarded by guys like Bowen in the past), he seems to struggle much more. That's just an observation, so take it as such, but MJ seemed to have more moves in the paint whereas Kobe relies more heavily on the jumpshot, and that does tend to result in a lower field goal percentage.

The Bulls had a good setup when MJ left. Putting Scottie in the leading role worked well for them...for a while. The very next season that same team struggled much more, and even when MJ came back to push their record to *I believe* 47 wins, they lost to Orlando in the playoffs. But as to whether or not Kobe needed more help than MJ, I think there's a simple answer:

MJ had six finals MVP awards. He was clearly the driving force behind each Bulls championship, and even in the one against Seattle where he struggled by HIS standards. (he still made 27 points a game) Kobe has none despite having appeared in 5 finals. Did Kobe struggle in the 2008 finals because his team wasn't as good as any of the championship teams MJ played on? That's probably part of it, but the fact is, MJ could often put together impressive offensive performances in losing efforts just the same. Watching the way that Pierce outplayed Kobe when it mattered most further hammers home the fact that he isn't MJ's equal. Whatever else you can say about MJ, he tended to play his best when it mattered most. Kobe, on the other hand, has been less consistent. History can attest to that.

MJ had his weaker moments like anyone else. No one is denying that. However, he rose to the occasion more often than any other player in NBA history, regardless of whether or not his team was able to join him. That's why many regard him as the greatest. Not because of hype and marketing. He had to fight for a long time before his team was good enough to win a title. It wasn't handed to him. And if the NBA gave him special treatment now and then with calls, that's something which is also true for Kobe, Lebron, Wade, Magic, Bird and any other current or past superstar, so it's a moot point for this particular comparison. I recall Brandon Roy recently mentioning how superstars get calls more easily and therefore defenders are more hesitant when guarding them and therefore they're even more effective.

j_for Says:
December 9th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
comparison huh?. how about today’s celtics vs bird-mchale-parish celts. hmmm.
today’s lakers vs magic-kareem-worthy lakers. This pistons vs dumars-isaiah-laimbeer deeetroit.
ewing-oakley-starks knick vs this years’ best defensive team. how about them 72-10 bulls to this days competition. ahhhhh, the 80’s and 90’s.

'nuff said.