I can't believe the direction this thread has gone.
Throw stats out the door for just a moment. There's no doubt as to where these three players rank: Kobe, Iverson, and Ginobili - in that order. And there's no doubt that the first two are superstars while the third is a star-level player. And there's no doubt that the Bryant vs. Iverson difference is significant.
That's how they'll finish. When healthy. When not healthy. When you truly evaluate them based on what they can do.
I like Ginobili the best of them. I'd rather play on a team with Ginobili than either of the other guys. Delusional as it is, I believe that, if I'm a player good enough to help a team, I'll get the chance to do it with Ginobili, and together, we'll be good enough to offset any difference between Bryant or Iverson and Ginobili. Playing alongside of Ginobili WON'T SUCK. I wouldn't care that he's not as good as Bryant or Iverson. After all - he's got me to help him - and that's worth something.
That doesn't mean Ginobili is a "role player." This is San An's designated threat at the end of a game we're talking about - much like Kobe was the Laker's designated end-game threat even in Shaq's 2000 MVP campaign. If Ginobili is nothing but a role-player, then neither was Bryant in 2000, and neither was Stockton across his entire career.
People seek to define a 1, a 1-A and 1-B, and a 2 in terms of who gets the ball in the clutch. Thanks for nothing, Jordan; everybody wants to be like Mike, and the fact is that most people who adopt that approach, for some unexplainable reason, think the first part of that they need to master is the smug, superior attitude - and most of them don't have anything more to offer than that.
After all - Jordan hit all the big shots in the Finals. Kobe hit all the big shots for the Lakers.
Sorry, John Paxson, Steve Kerr, Derek Fisher, Robert Horry - you're all stiffs. It's all about the superstar.
It's time to call dumb ideas dumb ideas and dumb basketball dumb basketball. Bad shots that go in are still bad shots. The league's defending 2-time MVP is a white, passing point guard (and the MVP award is about the only thing he can defend) for a reason - he's taking advantage of the talent around him to play better than his (lesser) talent would allow.
Isolation basketball is over. Jordan is old and gray, and good riddance. Maybe he'll take his attitude with him.
Team basketball is back - and it should have never left. This posturing and belittlement of players to try to determine "who's best, and how good are they" is something that should have gone out the window the moment you started playing basketball - if your coach was worth anything.
And if it hasn't? Then you're probably part of the problem. Be a Bobcat fan - you can cheer for Jordan as a GM or whatever over-inflated, undeserved title they've given him. After all - it's all about him, isn't it?
