Kobe is not the best player in the NBA.

[exodus]

This came out a few weeks ago:

Who would you choose: Kobe or LeBron?By John Hollinger

ESPN Insider

Archive

As great individual matchups go, this one's a doozy.

Thursday night features the season's first meeting between two of the NBA's top three scorers, Kobe Bryant and LeBron James. Both are dynamic wing players who seem capable of doing virtually anything on the right night. Both also have the baggage of being hailed as the Next Jordan, and the burden of carrying undermanned supporting casts (although in James' case, it's a more recent development, since the injury to Larry Hughes).

LeBron James and Kobe Bryant are the top two swingmen in the game. So who's better?

Yes, a nitpicker could point out that they won't be guarding each other much -- expect Ira Newble to be checking Bryant most of the evening while Lamar Odom and Devean George take turns against James -- but it still promises to be one of the year's most entertaining matchups.

And leading into it, one has to ponder a simple question: Who's better?

I don't mean better in the sense of career accomplishments (edge: Kobe) or what they accomplished at the same age (edge: LeBron). I'm talking about who is better right now. If you had to win a game tomorrow, which player would you choose first, Kobe or James?

To help us decide, I thought I'd break things down into the different phases of the game and see where that leads us.

Rebounding: This is the easiest one to decide, so let's start here. James has rebounded 9.2 percent of missed shots this season; Bryant has collected 8.4 percent. Although the advantage isn't large, consider that James was ahead of Bryant in his first two years, too. It's an open-and-shut case. Edge: LeBron.

Defense: Having survived the easiest measurable, let's move on to the toughest. Although we have some tools available to us for measuring defense, there aren't any hard-and-fast methods available for measuring defense as there are in other aspects of the game. However, a few metrics provide us with some solid clues to use in building on our subjective observations.

Subjectively, Bryant appears to be the better defender. He has been named first-team All-Defense twice, and although those selections were more the result of some well-timed performances on national TV than a consistent yearlong effort, the truth is that Bryant does expend more energy on defense than many other superstars.

James has his strong points, too. It's easy to forget how huge he is, which makes posting him up a virtual impossibility. He's also great at playing passing lanes and darting in for a steal.

However, as Tracy McGrady showed in the Rockets' win in Cleveland two weeks ago, James's lateral movement can be sluggish, and his help-side defense is also nothing to write home about.

Those qualities show up when we look at two measures: how each player's opponents fare individually and the overall success of his team.

AP

LeBron doesn't have to be a one-man show in Cleveland.

First, the teams. It's hard to argue that there's a substantial difference in defensive talent between the Cavs and Lakers -- both have relatively soft big men and one star on the wings -- yet the Lakers rank seventh overall in the NBA in Defensive Efficiency while the Cavs are 11th. Considering that each plays such a huge chunk of his team's minutes, this points right back to Bryant's and James' individual efforts.

Additionally, let's look at opponent performance. According to the folks at 82games.com, Bryant's opposite number has posted a Player Efficiency Rating of 12.7 over the course of the season, well below the league average of 15.0. In James' case, however, his opponents have posted a PER of 14.3 -- still not great, but much better than Bryant's foes have fared.

The only advantage for James is comparing their teams' on-court vs. off-court defensive performance. In other words, the difference between the Cavs with James and the Cavs without him has been much greater than for the Lakers and Bryant. But this is a small, unreliable sample because the two players are so rarely off the court. That's especially true in Bryant's case because the bulk of his off-court time came during a two-game suspension. Since both games came against offensively challenged Utah, it makes the Lakers' defense without Bryant seem much better than it really is.

So, Bryant still has the advantage. Edge: Kobe.

Passing: Based on reputation, you would think this would be James in a runaway. In reality, it's not quite so one-sided. Although it has been disappointing that James has looked for the pass much less this year than he had in his first two seasons, he still registers an assist on 16.7 percent of the possessions he uses. That won't remind anybody of Steve Nash, but it does rank James in the upper tier of small forwards.

The same can't be said for Bryant. His rate of 11.3 percent ranks 40th among the 51 shooting guards in the rankings table, right behind such luminaries Salim Stoudamire and Keith Bogans.

However, this season has been a major departure for him. The past three seasons, Bryant's Assist Ratio hovered around 17 percent, which would rank him even with James. So one can argue that extenuating circumstances -- i.e., the lack of teammates worth passing to -- have dampened Bryant's passing skill.

Additionally, compiling assists is only one part of passing. The other is avoiding a pass to the other team, and Bryant has fared better in this area than James. Bryant turns the ball over on 7.6 percent of his possessions this year, a truly outstanding rate for somebody who dominates the ball so much. James, meanwhile, is at 9.3 percent -- still above average, but not quite in Bryant's league.

However, since the assessment of each player's passing is so intertwined with his team's need for him to score, I'm going to table this discussion until we get to shooting/scoring below. In a minute, you'll see why. Edge: Even.

Locker room: Neither guy is known for being touchy-feely with his teammates, but until James gets a dominant center traded, this area has to be considered a big edge for him.

Bryant feuded with Shaq, of course, and more recently there's the rumor of a fracas between him and Odom after a loss to Washington. Yes, teammates don't necessarily have to like each other to win games -- Bryant and Shaq won three rings, remember -- but Bryant is widely perceived as the catalyst for his team's 2004 Finals implosion and subsequent demolition.

James is still adjusting to the leadership role his talent demands he take, as one might expect from a kid who just sipped his first legal drink a few weeks ago, but he wins this one by default. Edge: LeBron

AP Photo/David Zalubowski

If you want to know where the ball is, chances are Kobe has it.

Shooting/Scoring: OK, now for the big kahuna. All this other stuff is great, but when it gets down to it, the bulk of both players' value is in their scoring line. Each averages more than 30 points a game and is the focal point of the game plan for both his team and the opponent every night.

This is especially true in Bryant's case because he has fewer weapons to assist him than James does. Although one might argue it's partly a mess of Bryant's own making -- certainly Odom has been underused, for instance -- the triumvirate of Kwame Brown, Chris Mihm and Smush Parker isn't sending shivers down opponents' spines.

James, on the other hand, has a much better cast to work with. Even with high-scoring guard Hughes on the sidelines, James has an All-Star post man in Zydrunas Ilgauskas and solid producers such as Drew Gooden and Donyell Marshall for support.

The players' different realities show up in their stats. As I discussed recently, Bryant is using a bigger chunk of his team's possessions than any other player in history. After a brief letup at the start of December, he has redoubled his efforts, and his five straight 40-point nights haven't given him much incentive to stop.

However, this also subjects him to a swarm of double-teams and rotating defenders, which suppresses his shooting percentage. Bryant's 44.3 percent shooting mark is nothing to write home about, and it's a direct result of all this attention. Even in his recent scoring streak, he has shot below 45 percent in four of the five games.

James, on the other hand, doesn't have to dominate the ball as much. His Usage Rate, which measures how many possessions a player uses per 40 minutes, is the fifth-highest in the league, but still well beneath that of Bryant. However, he's still creating a ton of shots, and his shots are of a much higher quality. James is shooting 50.1 percent from the field, an amazing mark for a perimeter player who shoots more than 20 times a game. Additionally, James has been much better at getting to the line. The two players average nearly the same number of free-throw attempts per game (10.6 for Bryant, 9.9 for James), even though Bryant takes far more field-goal shots (27.1 to 21.6).

So which is more valuable -- taking a ton of shots on a bad team or fewer shots on a good one? How can we possibly adjust for the difference in their offensive situations?

One way is to bring passing back into the equation. Remember above when I said I'd table the discussion and reintroduce it? Here's why.

As many of you know, my Player Efficiency Rating tool rates a player's statistical production. But what we also can do with PER is subdivide it into different components of the game. In this case, we can throw out all the categories that aren't relevant to the current offensive discussion -- rebounds, blocks, steals and fouls, for instance -- and just focus on the scoring, passing and turnover categories. That way, we should get a clear look at whose performance has been better in the offensive realm. That should help adjust for the difference between their two situations.

Once we do that, the difference between the two is microscopic. James's "sub-PER" for offense is 23.81, while Bryant's is 23.44. Considering that a margin that small easily could shift to Bryant's favor in the course of one night, it hardly seems fair to base our decision on it.

But life isn't fair. As I said, we have to choose right now. And based on the available evidence, James wins. Edge: LeBron, by a margin thinner than Mischa Barton before breakfast.

Overall: So, looking at the advantages above, pretty much every category came down to a razor-thin margin. Nonetheless, one was a draw and three of the other four landed on the same side of the fence, and that seems to be telling. James is a better rebounder, scorer and teammate, and Bryant's only edge is in defense. If my life depended on winning one game, I'd be happy to have either of these two on my side. But right now, I'd pick LeBron.

[Admin]

And while I can agree with most of his analysis, its still based on stats for 2 completely different teams, where the superstars are asked to perform different roles.

Here is my short opinion on these categories.

Rebounding: James. He should be since he is bigger and plays more in the post.

Shooting: Kobe. While Lebron shoots a higher percentage, more of his shots are in the paint due to him being a bigger player and also playing the 3 while Kobe is the 1-2.

Defense: Kobe by a landslide. No need for further discussion.

Passing: James. This is a close one though because he does turn the ball over more and has better players to pass to, but he does seem to be a better passer. Kobe is an underrated passer though and if he was asked to distribute the ball more I think people would see that.

So for me its a wash. However, what it comes down to is this. Your team is down 1-3 points with 5 seconds left in the game. Who would you rather have, Kobe or Lebron? I would take Kobe 10 times out of 10. He has proven he can win the game at the end on a regular basis, while Lebron hasnt.

[Lascar78]

Quote:

---

Lebron makes those around him better because he has more talent around him.

---

This is nonsense. He makes those around him better because that is a primary focus of his. Kobe's only focus is scoring.

Lebron hasn't yet shown the ability to take a game over 1-on-1 like Kobe has, but I am inclined to think he will soon. As of today, he can't match Kobe's scoring, but he brings a lot more to the table. There is no doubt that I would choose to build around bron instead of kobe

[Traceman]

No question that LeBron is better than Kobe was at the same age but RIGHT NOW, Kobe is better. The best example of why Kobe is better was on display when they played against each other on National TV two weeks ago. In a close game in which neither was playing his best, Kobe comes down 3 consecutive times in crunch time and hits tough shot after tough shot to elevate his team to the win. Even though he had been off, when the game was on the line, he made the shots to win the game. The ability to elevate his game in crunch time is a quality he shares with the great ones like Jordan, Bird and Magic. on the otherhand, LeBron was unable to convert ANY of his attempts in crunch time and even passed up the opportunity to take the game winning shot. You think Kobe is passing up a shot in crunch time?

The thing about Kobe that separates him from LeBron (and most players) is his burning desire to be the best every time he steps on the court. A few players commented that most players would have let up after they got about 50 but what separates Kobe from the rest is that he never even CONSIDERED letting up. He was trying to KILL his opponent and that is something that LeBron doesn't have - at least not yet. LeBron and T Mac are on Kobe's level from a SKILLS standpoint but neither has that assassin's attitude like Kobe. AI has it but he is not big enough to impact the game like Kobe does.

LeBron has yet to even make the playoffs and Kobe has 3 rings.

[Diesel]

The only thing (really that Kobe is better at is Scoring) and that's not by a wide Margin. I noticed Hollinger bringing up Tmac, but I don't think I have ever seen Kobe shut down Tmac either. Moreover, it's difficult to determine what part is Kobe; James or the defensive scheme. I will give the experience edge to Kobe, but like his scoring is not enough for me to say "GRREEEAT Difference"...

[Lascar78]

I agree about Kobe's ability to elevate in the clutch. I think that with Lebron, he has a little bit of a KG syndrome. He is so good, yet he looks so hard to make his teammates better. He hasn't yet found the right balance and decision making in the clutch, in terms of deciding whether to attack alone or give it up. He will though.

I agree with the statement in your subject too

[Traceman]

getting the win with the game on the line. All the passing, rebounding, ballhandling, etc. in the world don't matter as much as the ability to win the game with the game on the line and Kobe does that quite often. Until LeBron can step up CONSISTENTLY like Kobe does and take over in crunch time, I think Kobe is the better player.

I think it would be pretty clear if you took a vote of NBA players, coaches and GMs right now as to who the better player is between Kobe and LeBron. If you asked them who they would rather build around though, you might get a different answer.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

I think that with Lebron, he has a little bit of a KG syndrome.

---

I think that is a legit comparison. Both are great team players that do everything well but neither are closers.

Bird didn't have the physical skills those guys had but was a better closer than both put together. Even though he was the consumate team player and elevated his teamates when the game was on the line he wanted the ball and everyone else just had to gtf out of the way.

Bird wasn't the complete player by any means but mentally he had the perfect blend of teamate and closer.

[Plainview1981]

Quote:

---

Lebron has Gooden, Big Z, Marshall, and Hughes.

Kobe has Odom, Parker, Mihm, and George

If we continue down the line, I think that it's probably closer to even than an outright win for Lebron. After the big 4, who does Cleveland have?? Ira? Gooden came out 3 yrs ago and has already played for 1-2-3-4 teams... He's been like Jim Jackson with less respect.

---

You have got to be kdiding me! Biz Z, Marshall, Hughes have all been starting and productive on winning teams. The only one you can say the samething for with Kobe is Odom... Do you really think Smush would even make the Hawks roster now? He was struggling to make a roster in the NBA because he stinks.

I seriousally can;t believe this. LOL

[Diesel]

Click here.

Quote:

---

6. LeBron James, Cavaliers. When he hit three 3-pointers in 55 seconds in the season opener, cold sweats broke out across the league. If the guy's going to shoot like that, forget about stopping him. He's considered by most G.M.s to be the league's most athletic player. Oh yeah -- he's only 20.

---

Quote:

---

8. Kobe Bryant, Lakers. Based on early returns, Phil-Kobe Act II is going to be good for Kobe. His talent and drive are unsurpassed, but to return to our top five, Kobe has to take the Lakers into late May.

---

[Traceman]

Anybody who thinks that Kobe is the EIGHTH best player in the NBA RIGHT NOW is smoking crack.

Actually, a lot of those rankings would change. I suspect Brand and AI would be quite a bit higher as well.

[DominiqueWilkins]

It’s not hard to make the talent look better on your team when Lebron has a squad that’s a lot more talented. Kobe doesn’t have guys on his team that can produce the numbers like the teammates Lebron has. The Lakers lack talent at almost every position, so it’s basically a Kobe, and Lamar Odom world out west.

[Diesel]

I would easily take Mihm/Odom over Gooden/Big Z.

Now, Hughes/George is a different story.

Snow/Parker... I don't know... I guess I would take old man snow.

Kwame Brown over Hendu.

I would say the talent comparison isn't that far from equal...

[AHF]

Quote:

---

I would easily take Mihm/Odom over Gooden/Big Z.

Now, Hughes/George is a different story.

Snow/Parker... I don't know... I guess I would take old man snow.

Kwame Brown over Hendu.

I would say the talent comparison isn't that far from equal...

---

Marshall gives the edge to Cleveland. He is a high quality, versatile contributor.