Who is the NBA player of the decade?

[Joe Vancil]

While Duncan and O'Neal represent a greater dominance on the court, I don't think that anyone can deny that Kobe Bryant is the player of this decade.

Bryant has 4 titles and 6 finals appearances (so far), which is more than either Duncan or O'Neal.  Every news story has centered on Kobe moreso than on any player:  Kobe wants a trade, Kobe and Shaq are fighting, Kobe's accused of rape, Kobe's a free agent, Kobe is getting/commiting flagrant fouls, did Kobe quit on his team, will Kobe get another title to catch Shaq....

There's been no player more in the consciousness of fans around the game than Kobe Bryant.  Like him or hate him, as the most polarizing figure in NBA basketball, he well-defines the 00's decade:  divisive, self-centered and self-interested, and ultimately, the biggest spectacle - whether you're watching him win a championship or watching him crash and burn.  In a culture dominated by reality TV, how can anyone say that the NBA's biggest name in the decade isn't Kobe Bryant - the very definiton of reality basketball?

An argument to that is that Shaq helped Kobe to 4 of those trips, he is still brought up almost as much as Kobe is between the 'how my a^$ taste freestyle' and Kobe snitching on Shaq to the cops during the rape allegations.  Even now the finals still have the stench of Shaq on them with Orlando not making it to the finals since he left and the Lakers not winning a title since he left.  Not to mention Shaq is still one of the players teams in this league seek to try to win a title.  Miami did it.  The Suns made an attempt.  Looks like the Cavs will follow suit.

If Kobe continues to win I agree with you.  Right now I think a case can be made for Duncan, Shaq, and now Kobe (based on your post).  If by some crazy accident/stroke of luck the Cavs ended up with Shaq and got to the promise land Kobe could be bumped out just like that.  3 teams, 3 titles, helped the development of the 3 biggest stars in the league.....

One thing you also forgot to mention about Kobe is the gold medal, being the leader in restoring our dominance in world basketball, and influencing the younger guys under him to have a better, more dedicated work ethic.   I  think you are being a bit harsh  in only bringing up times he has been divisive and self centered.  The guy also showed that people can be humbled and learn from their mistakes.  I think he has and that's a big reason why the Lakers are a better team and have a title again.  However, you are right in the sense that this league has made a shift.  Kobe may be the face because hes the best player in the league but that shift to players being more self centered, run isolation, do it all, all the attention on me is a Michael Jordan byproduct.  Not something created by Kobe.

I did forget the Olympic team.  I would not, however, characterize it as "Kobe's team" any more than I'd characterize 1992 as Jordan's.  In fact, without the play of Wade (or in 1992, Barkley), the team would look like a mere shell of what it was.  And there were certainly other step-forward leaders who prevented all the focus from being on one player (Magic for '92, James for '08).

As for the statements, "The guy also showed that people can be humbled and learn from their mistakes.  I think he has and that's a big reason why the Lakers are a better team and have a title again," I think you're completely off-base.  I don't think Bryant has shown that people can be humbled and learn from their mistakes.  I think that he's shown that if you whine for something and you have talent, you'll get what you want.  Take away Gasol and Odom - a verifiable All-Star and a near All-Star - who *DON'T* have to be "the man" - and the Lakers are an ordinary team.  Replace Gasol with Amare Stoudemire, who wants to be "the man," and does this Laker team win it all?  Replace Gasol with an in-his-prime Hakeem Olajuwown - who was the centerpiece of his teams - and does Kobe defer to him?  Kobe benefitted by getting stars who weren't "needy," which does not prove that he is or isn't "needy."  In truth, Shaq and Kobe *BOTH* could be called "The Big Needy."  Ask yourself this:  if Gasol had been the focus, had won the playoff MVP, had been mentioned in the MVP voting as a top contender to James, WOULD KOBE HAVE BEEN HAPPY WITH THE CHAMPIONSHIP?  Granted, it's just my opinion, but I say, "He never was before, so I still say 'NO.'"

As for "Kobe may be the face because hes the best player in the league but that shift to players being more self centered, run isolation, do it all, all the attention on me is a Michael Jordan byproduct.  Not something created by Kobe," I can't deny the Jordan influence here, and it rings really loud when you hear someone say "he's the best player in the league," because there's no way in the world I buy that while Duncan is still in the mix.  And while I cannot deny it was not created *BY* Kobe, I think it's rather obvious that being considered for that particular role is what drives Bryant's actions.  Jordan may have ascended to the role, but no one has SO PASSIONATELY SOUGHT OUT the role with the doggedness that Bryant has.  So perhaps the wording should be "created by Jordan, *FOR* a player like Kobe."

In my view of Bryant, he represents everything that is wrong with the Jordanesque image and mentality - as opposed to the deep humility of the individual man for whom the playoff MVP trophy is named.  In 40 years, when Bryant is asked how a team of his generation would stack up against the 2049 champion, Bryant will say, "We'd have won.  I would have..." whereas Russell says, "We would have won.  We would have..."

[Joe Vancil]

Depends on the definitionn of a decade.  The article uses from 2000-2009 (title year) to define the decade.  Most people start the decade at xx01 and end it in xx10.  For example: is the 80's decade from 1980-1989 or 1981-1990?

No way, why would the 80's include a 90's year?  Who was the ONLY champ in 2000?  There is only 1 champ per calander year even though a season carries two years.  1980 to 1989 does not include a 70's year nor does it contain a 90's year.

So the champ in 2000 (Lakers) to the champ in 2009 (Lakers) are the book ends to the decade.  I can't beleive this is a point of contention.

Well, genius, does the 10 year period start with year 1 or year 0?

Or put another way; when did the first decade end in the year 9 or year 10?

Now, now, Lurker....you know how the system works.  When asking who won the most titles in this decade, it's the four Laker titles rather than the Spurs three - which counts the 1999-2000 Laker team, but when asking if the Lakers won a title in the '90's, the answer is yes - the 1999-2000 team.

It's not nice to taunt the champs.

[westkoast]

I did forget the Olympic team.  I would not, however, characterize it as "Kobe's team" any more than I'd characterize 1992 as Jordan's.  In fact, without the play of Wade (or in 1992, Barkley), the team would look like a mere shell of what it was.  And there were certainly other step-forward leaders who prevented all the focus from being on one player (Magic for '92, James for '08).

I didn't say it was his team but he was deemed the leader and many players on the team (Wade, Melo, James) all talked about how he influenced their games and work ethic.  

Comparing the 92 team with this team is off base on your side Joe.  You are comparing a team who had leaders like Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, John Stockton, and Michael Jordan (to name a few).  It was more than just 'one other step forward leader'.  You had guys who not only were the top star on their team but also led their teams to multiple championships (Stockton obviously not doing that but still a much better leader than most on this squad).  Out of everyone who was on this Dream Team the only two players with the same level of championship experience was Wade and Bryant.  No surprise they were also two of the best players out on the floor.  You can't even compare Kobe, Bron, Dwayne to Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, and Larry Bird in terms of ' leadership ' Obviously Michael wasn't the clear leader because well, a number of the guys he played with were later in their career and did not need the same type of leadership Kobe provided when it came to work ethic and studying the game.  Melo, Bron, Bosh, Howard, etc are all younger players.  So its comparing apples and oranges.  One thing is a fact, the influence on the other players was there and that has to account for something.  The old Kobe wouldn't have done what he did for that team.  He wouldn't have led guys, he would have sat by himself listening to his ipod all day.  He wouldn't have made friends with Melo, he wouldn't have had guys praising him.  In fact I would go as far to say that he would have returned getting flack for it.  That did not happen because he learned from his mistakes and was humbled by criticism (which he deserved to a point).....

As for the statements, "The guy also showed that people can be humbled and learn from their mistakes.  I think he has and that's a big reason why the Lakers are a better team and have a title again," I think you're completely off-base.  I don't think Bryant has shown that people can be humbled and learn from their mistakes.  I think that he's shown that if you whine for something and you have talent, you'll get what you want.  Take away Gasol and Odom - a verifiable All-Star and a near All-Star - who *DON'T* have to be "the man" - and the Lakers are an ordinary team.  Replace Gasol with Amare Stoudemire, who wants to be "the man," and does this Laker team win it all?  Replace Gasol with an in-his-prime Hakeem Olajuwown - who was the centerpiece of his teams - and does Kobe defer to him?  Kobe benefitted by getting stars who weren't "needy," which does not prove that he is or isn't "needy."  In truth, Shaq and Kobe *BOTH* could be called "The Big Needy."  Ask yourself this:  if Gasol had been the focus, had won the playoff MVP, had been mentioned in the MVP voting as a top contender to James, WOULD KOBE HAVE BEEN HAPPY WITH THE CHAMPIONSHIP?  Granted, it's just my opinion, but I say, "He never was before, so I still say 'NO.'"

You are playing a what if game so there's really no point to address that.  My comment about 'being humbled and learning from his mistakes' is more about him trying to do it all, not trusting teammates, and not embracing his teammates like a brother/friend as oppose to just another co-worker.  He has shown he has been humbled and he has shown to bounce back.  The Lakers have a title in a large part because he was humbled as a player and teammate.  He bounced back by changing his game and attitude to lead this team to two finals apperances and one title.

Wanting help to win a title is part of the game.  You call it whining.  I call it getting things done.  We all knew he didn't have the talent around him and he was a good player who could lead a team to a title, so why not force a franchise to make a move?  If he just shut up do you think the Lakers would have really went after Gasol the same way?  Probably not.  Why do I say that?  I guess for the same reason your saying Kobe wouldn't be happy if Gasol won the Finals MVP....because the Lakers were not before so I will say 'NO'

As for "Kobe may be the face because hes the best player in the league but that shift to players being more self centered, run isolation, do it all, all the attention on me is a Michael Jordan byproduct.  Not something created by Kobe," I can't deny the Jordan influence here, and it rings really loud when you hear someone say "he's the best player in the league," because there's no way in the world I buy that while Duncan is still in the mix.  And while I cannot deny it was not created *BY* Kobe, I think it's rather obvious that being considered for that particular role is what drives Bryant's actions.  Jordan may have ascended to the role, but no one has SO PASSIONATELY SOUGHT OUT the role with the doggedness that Bryant has.  So perhaps the wording should be "created by Jordan, *FOR* a player like Kobe."

I didn't realize people got negative points for wanting to be the best player on the planet.  People want to be Michael Jordan because he's the best basketball player on the planet.  Only Kobe Bryant can take flack for wanting to be the best basketball player on the planet.  I find this statement crazy and well, down right twisting to fit a specific view.  Disagree with me all you want but everything the guy does is set to be the best basketball player in the world.  Since Jordan holds that title I don't see the problem with emulating him.

Again, doing everything in your power to be the best player in the world is somehow a bad thing in your eyes.  That I don't understand.  Quite frankly you can't say you know for sure he is only doing it for the fame and not because the guy loves to play and compete in the game of basketball.

In my view of Bryant, he represents everything that is wrong with the Jordanesque image and mentality - as opposed to the deep humility of the individual man for whom the playoff MVP trophy is named.  In 40 years, when Bryant is asked how a team of his generation would stack up against the 2049 champion, Bryant will say, "We'd have won.  I would have..." whereas Russell says, "We would have won.  We would have..."

I guess you missed the press conference on TV Joe.  When talking about the title and his finals MVP trophy he said 'WE' many many times if not asked about a question specific to himself.  Even when they asked about winning with out Shaq he fell back to talking about enjoying the TEAMS they were apart of.  Or last year when he thanked his teammates for his MVP first. 

The main problem with Kobe (and I do think he did some of this to himself) is he never gets the benefit of the doubt on anything.  First thought in a lot of non-Laker fans head is a complete negative view on whatever is being debated.  For example the guy strives to be the best basketball player on the planet and somehow you view that as him only wanting to do that to feed his ego/to get attention.  Instead of giving him the benefit of the doubt that he loves the game.  The guy spends countless hours in the gym, watching tape, and studying the game.  If he was in it just for the fame I think you would see a different player.  One of the reasons he didn't get along well with a number of people when he came into the league is the only thing he cared about was basketball.  He didn't care about going to the strip clubs or going to the dance club, he focused in on basketball.  To certain people it looked as if he was an a-hole because basketball was his entire life (and sad if you think about it)


Maybe someday Non-Laker fans will give Kobe the chance to change in their own minds.  Certainly he has changed to a lot of other people but for some (and this isn't even directed specifically or just at you) reason people still act like 2001 Kobe is the same as 2009 Kobe.   While he has more to work on  the fact of the matter is he has matured.  Everyone else is allowed to grow and mature...except Kobe.  When people in their 20s make mistakes and show they learned from them they are not thrown back in their face over and over...except Kobe.   Let's take into mind that he was 23-24 years old when the Shaq/Kobe thing was going on.  Still a very young man with a lot to learn.  He has got older, he has got mature, and he has changed.  The only place he hasn't changed is in people's heads who dislike him for any number of reasons.  One of which seems to be because he is the new age face for something Michael Jordan and the league created.  Let's not leave the league out of this when it comes to pushing for more super star personas then team play because well, teams dont sell products quite as well as individuals.  If they 'created' this how exactly does he get blamed for it if he was groomed by the league, at age 18 as a child, to fall into that ?  You have no problem holding it against Kobe but deflect blame from Jordan and the league?  To me it seems that it would be easier to deflect blame from someone who was groomed as a child to fill a super star slot for the new era of NBA than it would be from the league that did it and the guy who gave the league the idea in the first place.

And as for talking about Jordan and these other players....let's just say the media attention wasn't quite there like it is now.  Not as rabid, not as negative.  I would love to see a Charles Barkley or Michael Jordan handle todays rabid media.  Could you imagine what would happen to Dwight Howard if he was caught with 2 white hookers in a hotel like James Worthy?  What if Carmelo Anthony got HIV and gave it to his wife?  Think about what happened to Ron Artest when he went into the stands and then think back to Barkley throwing the guy through the glass window.  Ron Artest will never in his life live down going into the stands.  People forgot about the Barkley story because it wasn't constantly being brought up. 

[WayOutWest]

Now, now, Lurker....you know how the system works.  When asking who won the most titles in this decade, it's the four Laker titles rather than the Spurs three - which counts the 1999-2000 Laker team, but when asking if the Lakers won a title in the '90's, the answer is yes - the 1999-2000 team.

It's not nice to taunt the champs.

IMO the team that holds up the trophy in June is the champ for that year.

The only argument is where you start a decade and it seems really obvious to start it at 0.

[Lurker]

Now, now, Lurker....you know how the system works.  When asking who won the most titles in this decade, it's the four Laker titles rather than the Spurs three - which counts the 1999-2000 Laker team, but when asking if the Lakers won a title in the '90's, the answer is yes - the 1999-2000 team.

It's not nice to taunt the champs.

IMO the team that holds up the trophy in June is the champ for that year.

The only argument is where you start a decade and it seems really obvious to start it at 0.

Obvious only to those who are educated in the LA school system.  There never was a year 0.

Decades:

Years 1-10; 11-20; 21-30; 31-40; 41-50; 51-60; 61-70; 71-80; 81-90; 91-100

Was the year 2000 the end of the millenium?  If yes, then which millenium had only 999 years instead of 1000?

[Joe Vancil]

I didn't realize people got negative points for wanting to be the best player on the planet.  People want to be Michael Jordan because he's the best basketball player on the planet.  Only Kobe Bryant can take flack for wanting to be the best basketball player on the planet.  I find this statement crazy and well, down right twisting to fit a specific view.  Disagree with me all you want but everything the guy does is set to be the best basketball player in the world.  Since Jordan holds that title I don't see the problem with emulating him.

Ambition is only a positive when it isn't accompanied by jealousy.  We saw a crystal clear example of how to do that in Magic Johnson.  We saw the problems from overwhelming, jealous ambition on Kobe Bryant.

Again, doing everything in your power to be the best player in the world is somehow a bad thing in your eyes.  That I don't understand.  Quite frankly you can't say you know for sure he is only doing it for the fame and not because the guy loves to play and compete in the game of basketball.

YES, doing everything in your power to be the best is a bad thing, when things that are in your power include alienating teammates.

The main problem with Kobe (and I do think he did some of this to himself) is he never gets the benefit of the doubt on anything.  First thought in a lot of non-Laker fans head is a complete negative view on whatever is being debated. 

And that squeaky-clean, all-time good guy image took a pounding based on Bryant's own actions.  He never gets the benefit of the doubt because he proved long ago - and to his own detriment - that he no longer DESERVES it.

The guy spends countless hours in the gym, watching tape, and studying the game. 

So do many other players.  Few are such complete jerks that people don't want to deal with them - even SOME of the time.

And so do hundreds of thousands of kids, who don't get paychecks to do it, nor the praise of millions.  They *REALLY* do it for the love of the game, because that's all they get.  Most of them aren't jerks to those around them, either.

He didn't care about going to the strip clubs or going to the dance club, he focused in on basketball. 

And you still buy the squeaky-clean image right up to Denver, right?

How come any time we talk about Kobe and the change in his attitude, ever note that it is always *AFTER* the rape thing was dismissed?  *AFTER* we found out that what he'd been selling all along was a load of manure?

Kobe didn't change.  He re-invented himself.

To certain people it looked as if he was an a-hole because basketball was his entire life (and sad if you think about it)

Can't agree.  A lot of people work very hard for careers, and aren't complete jerks.  Others mimic a story by two brothers who were friends of mine about their father:  one said, "My dad says it's his job to be an @$$#013."  The other piped in, "And Dad is really good at his job!"  Bryant's life is his own, to live as he sees fit, and to reap the benefits and the consequences of his choices.  But I think he'd be better served to remember to leave work *AT* work, no matter how much he wants to be the best at what he does.  I guess the memory of the story of my friends gives me a different take on the "Grumpy" story of Bryant's little girl.  It tells me that Bryant hasn't changed at all, and is still the same self-centered jerk that we saw back in the early 00's.

I can't call Bryant's life "sad."  He made his choices, and he's succeeded in doing that which he set out to do.  It's hard for me to feel sorry for such a person.  I tend to refer to them as an example of success.  It's up to THEM to say that it was at too high a price.



Maybe someday Non-Laker fans will give Kobe the chance to change in their own minds.  Certainly he has changed to a lot of other people but for some (and this isn't even directed specifically or just at you) reason people still act like 2001 Kobe is the same as 2009 Kobe.  That is just not the truth.  Everyone else is allowed to grow and mature...except Kobe.  Let's take into mind that he was 23-24 years old when the Shaq/Kobe thing was going on.  Still a very young man with a lot to learn.  He has got older, he has got mature, and he has changed.  The only place he hasn't changed is in people's heads who dislike him for any number of reasons.  One of which seems to be because he is the new age face for something Michael Jordan and the league created.  Let's not leave the league out of this when it comes to pushing for more super star personas then team play because well, teams dont sell products quite as well as individuals.  If they 'created' this how exactly does he get blamed for it if he was groomed by the league, at age 18, to fall into that ? 
[/quote]

[WayOutWest]

Obvious only to those who are educated in the LA school system.  There never was a year 0.

Decades:

Years 1-10; 11-20; 21-30; 31-40; 41-50; 51-60; 61-70; 71-80; 81-90; 91-100

Was the year 2000 the end of the millenium?  If yes, then which millenium had only 999 years instead of 1000?

That's cause those small minded morons in history did not understand the concept of ZERO, they figured it out eventually, sorta like figuring out the world was not flat nor was it the center of the universe.  

So is there some centry were an entire year went by in the blink of one day?  I proclaim today to be year 1!!!  

Decades:

Years 1-10; 11-20; 21-30; 31-40; 41-50; 51-60; 61-70; 71-80; 81-90; 91-100

So the decade of the 30's has a year called "forty" in it?  Yea that makes a lot of sense. 

Follow me if you can....
Nineteen THIRTY
Nineteen THIRTY one
Nineteen THIRTY two
Nineteen THIRTY three
Nineteen THIRTY four
Nineteen THIRTY five
Nineteen THIRTY six
Nineteen THIRTY seven
Nineteen THIRTY eight
Nineteen THIRTY nine

Did you hear anything in those TEN years that sounded like "TWENTY" or "FORTY"?  NO!  That's cause those were the "THIRTIES"!!!  I can't believe I have to explain this! 

[westkoast]

Joe comparing a blue colar worker to a profesionnal athlete who is constantly covered by people in the media and fans a like is a bad analogy on your part.  

First and foremost, a lot of people do not start their career at 18.  They are also not shined under a microscope for everything they do.  It's again, apples and oranges.  If your father got into an argument with a co-worker there isnt millions of people talking about it.  When I get into an argument with a co-worker over a project I am not looked at by the entire engineering industry as some kind of bad guy.  The nature of the job and pro sports in this country is a much different beast so you can't use 'everyday man, blue colar' analogies for pro athletes in America.

Again though, your response to me is based on never giving him the benefit of the doubt and forever holding things against him.  Would it be fair if we held poor decisions other people we know have made in their younger years against them till the end of time?  Would it be fair to bash the kid in the mailroom for screwing up when hes 20 all the way when he's a manager in his 30?  No.  That wouldn't be fair.  I don't see why it's fair to do it to Kobe Bryant.  He has changed.  His teammates and people around him talk about it.  His coaches have talked about it.  Just about everyone except for people who dislike him already.  He is not allowed to learn from his mistakes and grow.  I think that is unfair.  Personally I have made a number of bad decisions myself when i was 18-19 years old.  I would hate to be going into my 30s and still have people hold it against me that I use to get drunk at parties acting a fool now that I don't drink very often.  I'd hate for people to forever view me as the smart mouthed party kid I was in high school when I have worked so hard to have a quality career, made a good life for myself, and am very responsible compared to others around my age.

Is Kobe arrogant? Yes.  Has he been an a-hole to people? Most definetely.  The question is though when was he that way towards you to where you can't give him the chance to ever break away from mistakes he made before?

[WayOutWest]

I didn't realize people got negative points for wanting to be the best player on the planet.  People want to be Michael Jordan because he's the best basketball player on the planet.  Only Kobe Bryant can take flack for wanting to be the best basketball player on the planet.  I find this statement crazy and well, down right twisting to fit a specific view.  Disagree with me all you want but everything the guy does is set to be the best basketball player in the world.  Since Jordan holds that title I don't see the problem with emulating him.

Ambition is only a positive when it isn't accompanied by jealousy.  We saw a crystal clear example of how to do that in Magic Johnson.  We saw the problems from overwhelming, jealous ambition on Kobe Bryant.

Again, doing everything in your power to be the best player in the world is somehow a bad thing in your eyes.  That I don't understand.  Quite frankly you can't say you know for sure he is only doing it for the fame and not because the guy loves to play and compete in the game of basketball.

YES, doing everything in your power to be the best is a bad thing, when things that are in your power include alienating teammates.

The main problem with Kobe (and I do think he did some of this to himself) is he never gets the benefit of the doubt on anything.  First thought in a lot of non-Laker fans head is a complete negative view on whatever is being debated. 

And that squeaky-clean, all-time good guy image took a pounding based on Bryant's own actions.  He never gets the benefit of the doubt because he proved long ago - and to his own detriment - that he no longer DESERVES it.

The guy spends countless hours in the gym, watching tape, and studying the game. 

So do many other players.  Few are such complete jerks that people don't want to deal with them - even SOME of the time.

And so do hundreds of thousands of kids, who don't get paychecks to do it, nor the praise of millions.  They *REALLY* do it for the love of the game, because that's all they get.  Most of them aren't jerks to those around them, either.

He didn't care about going to the strip clubs or going to the dance club, he focused in on basketball. 

And you still buy the squeaky-clean image right up to Denver, right?

How come any time we talk about Kobe and the change in his attitude, ever note that it is always *AFTER* the rape thing was dismissed?  *AFTER* we found out that what he'd been selling all along was a load of manure?

Kobe didn't change.  He re-invented himself.

To certain people it looked as if he was an a-hole because basketball was his entire life (and sad if you think about it)

Can't agree.  A lot of people work very hard for careers, and aren't complete jerks.  Others mimic a story by two brothers who were friends of mine about their father:  one said, "My dad says it's his job to be an @$$#013."  The other piped in, "And Dad is really good at his job!"  Bryant's life is his own, to live as he sees fit, and to reap the benefits and the consequences of his choices.  But I think he'd be better served to remember to leave work *AT* work, no matter how much he wants to be the best at what he does.  I guess the memory of the story of my friends gives me a different take on the "Grumpy" story of Bryant's little girl.  It tells me that Bryant hasn't changed at all, and is still the same self-centered jerk that we saw back in the early 00's.

I can't call Bryant's life "sad."  He made his choices, and he's succeeded in doing that which he set out to do.  It's hard for me to feel sorry for such a person.  I tend to refer to them as an example of success.  It's up to THEM to say that it was at too high a price.



Maybe someday Non-Laker fans will give Kobe the chance to change in their own minds.  Certainly he has changed to a lot of other people but for some (and this isn't even directed specifically or just at you) reason people still act like 2001 Kobe is the same as 2009 Kobe.  That is just not the truth.  Everyone else is allowed to grow and mature...except Kobe.  Let's take into mind that he was 23-24 years old when the Shaq/Kobe thing was going on.  Still a very young man with a lot to learn.  He has got older, he has got mature, and he has changed.  The only place he hasn't changed is in people's heads who dislike him for any number of reasons.  One of which seems to be because he is the new age face for something Michael Jordan and the league created.  Let's not leave the league out of this when it comes to pushing for more super star personas then team play because well, teams dont sell products quite as well as individuals.  If they 'created' this how exactly does he get blamed for it if he was groomed by the league, at age 18, to fall into that ? 
[ /quote ]

Dear Allah!!!  Another "quote" challanged posters.  When will it end?

[WayOutWest]

I'd hate for people to forever view me as the smart mouthed party kid I was in high school when I have worked so hard to have a quality career.

I find that really hard to believe...the "smart" part that is....

[westkoast]

I'd hate for people to forever view me as the smart mouthed party kid I was in high school when I have worked so hard to have a quality career.

I find that really hard to believe...the "smart" part that is....

LOL ok how about 'sarcastic prick' ?

[Joe Vancil]

Again though, your response to me is based on never giving him the benefit of the doubt and forever holding things against him.  Would it be fair if we held poor decisions other people we know have made in their younger years against them till the end of time?  Would it be fair to bash the kid in the mailroom for screwing up when hes 20 all the way when he's a manager when hes 30?  No.  That wouldn't be fair.  I don't see why it's fair to do it to Kobe Bryant.  He has changed.  His teammates and people around him talk about it.  His coaches have talked about it.  Just about everyone except for people who dislike him already.  He is not allowed to learn from his mistakes and grow.  I think that is unfair.  Personally I have made a number of bad decisions myself when i was 18-19 years old.  I would hate to be going into my 30s and still have people hold it against me that I use to get drunk at parties acting a fool now that I don't drink very often.  I'd hate for people to forever view me as the smart mouthed party kid I was in high school when I have worked so hard to have a quality career, made a good life for myself, and am very responsible compared to others around my age.

Spare me the "everybody deserves a second chance" thing.  Not everyone gets a second chance - whether they do or not depends on just how bad what they did was, and how repentant they are for their mistakes.  Ask a parolee if he is really getting a second chance.  Ask a corrupt politician.  Ask a child-molesting priest.

In terms of public relations, how ANYONE can think Bryant has earned a "second chance" is beyond me.  

Come on, guys - tons of us here play basketball.  How much of a second chance would you give Kobe Bryant if he treated you the way he treated most of his former (and many of his present) teammates?

Is Kobe arrogant? Yes.  Has he been an a-hole to people? Most definetely.  The question is though when was he that way towards you to where you can't give him the chance to ever break away from mistakes he made before?

No, the question is whether a perceptible change in his attitude toward those he wronged and some semblence of regret has occurred to WARRANT a second chance.

[Joe Vancil]

I'd hate for people to forever view me as the smart mouthed party kid I was in high school when I have worked so hard to have a quality career.

I find that really hard to believe...the "smart" part that is....

LOL ok how about 'sarcastic prick' ?

No, no....he's looking for a desription of YOU...not of HIM....

[westkoast]

Spare me the "everybody deserves a second chance" thing.  Not everyone gets a second chance - whether they do or not depends on just how bad what they did was, and how repentant they are for their mistakes.  Ask a parolee if he is really getting a second chance.  Ask a corrupt politician.  Ask a child-molesting priest.

Are we really comparing a guy who lets his competitive nature get in the way of treating every single person in the league 'nice' with a child molestor?  You are right, not everyone gets a second chance.  Making mistakes as a teenager/young adult and buying into media hype to the point you do questionable things because of your inflated ego is something you can give someone a second chance for.  I don't see how you want to view what Kobe did as unworthy of giving the guy a chance to learn from his mistakes and mature. 

You wouldn't do it to your nephew at that age would you?   Now that you know I was that drunk party kid in high school are you going to forever view me as that or can you see that as I've grown up I've changed into a different person, with a different outlook on life, and a different attitude in general?  I no longer get very drunk, act like a fool/prick, and only care about myself.  I don't drink too often, I never act a fool (contrary to my joke posting around here), and I put a lot of people over myself.  Specifically my younger brother who I help take care of.

In terms of public relations, how ANYONE can think Bryant has earned a "second chance" is beyond me.  

He has shown that he has matured and learned from his mistake.  Had he not the Lakers would not be as a successful as a team right now.  Adding a Pau Gasol to the 2005 Kobe is not going to get them a championship.

The fact that anyone cannot give a person a 'second chance' when that said person never did anything personally to someone like yourself is beyond me.  Had Kobe been a jerk to you or your family specifically then I can totally understand you being reluctant to give him a second chance.  The fact that you are upset because Kobe and a guy like  Devean George didn't get along is, well weird.  I say George since it was George who was the 'leak' in the organization  that was that 'anonymous source' in the locker room for all those years.  Those leaks were very much the fuel behind a lot of the Kobe bashing of teammates.  Was it all made up?  I don't think so and farther down you'll see my comparison to this guy I play basketball with.  I think his attitude towards the game of everything being game 7 of the finals rubs a number of guys the wrong way.

Come on, guys - tons of us here play basketball.  How much of a second chance would you give Kobe Bryant if he treated you the way he treated most of his former (and many of his present) teammates?

Most?  I think that's stretching it.  Fox, Fisher, Grant, Gasol, Sasha, etc all sing Kobe's praises and have for years.  Shaq and George didn't.  How does praise from all these other former teammates get pushed to the side by a fued with a guy like Shaq is forever held against Kobe?  Even when we all know that the Shaq/Kobe fued was bad on both sides.  Even going as far back as Shaq doing it to Kobe from the jump when he showed up because he has a buzz and Shaq felt like some of his shine was going to be deflected.  Don't believe me?  Ask some Laker fans.

I play with a guy every week who plays VERY hard.  He is super competitive and every pick up game is game 7 of the NBA finals.  Does he get annoying?  At times yes, he gets on players who are not playing as hard as he is.  At the same time when I am on his team we win often and he doesn't say anything to me because I always play hard.  He reminds me very much of Kobe.  Some people do call him a D-word behind his back when he's not around but since I know him well (we use to work together) I know he doesn't do it to make people feel bad nor is he a bad person.  He is just ultra competitive and it rubs people the wrong way.  Especially when you consider we don't get paid to play.   From the outside looking in you think hes an a-hole who takes things too serious.  Knowing him personally and being around him outside of the court I know him to be a really nice guy, a great father, and wouldn't want to do harm to anyone.

No, the question is whether a perceptible change in his attitude toward those he wronged and some semblence of regret has occurred to WARRANT a second chance.

In your mind that perception he has changed is never going to come because you've put up a mental road block in the form of using Kobe Bryant as the scapegoat for what you dont like about the game compared to when you were younger.  That's your right to do it.  Who am I to say you can't.  I also do agree with certain problems you have with the direction the sport has taken at the pro level.  I go a little bit farther than Kobe to find out why that is though.

He has done the following:

- Learned that he has to be a team player on the floor
- Learned that teammates are more family than they are co-worker
- Subscribed to everything Phil Jackson has wanted and asked him to do to improve his leadership skills and play

That to me says he is trying and learning.  Had he not made any progress I'd have NO ARGUMENT whatsoever.  The fact that he has matured and improved gives me plenty of ground to stand on in this debate.  Though as always, I do enjoy talking with you even if we disagree on this.

[WayOutWest]

I play with a guy every week who plays VERY hard.  He is super competitive and every pick up game is game 7 of the NBA finals.  Does he get annoying?  At times yes, he gets on players who are not playing as hard as he is.  At the same time when I am on his team we win often and he doesn't say anything to me because I always play hard.  He reminds me very much of Kobe.  Some people do call him a D-word behind his back when he's not around but since I know him well (we use to work together) I know he doesn't do it to make people feel bad nor is he a bad person.  He is just ultra competitive and it rubs people the wrong way.  Especially when you consider we don't get paid to play.   From the outside looking in you think hes an a-hole who takes things too serious.  Knowing him personally and being around him outside of the court I know him to be a really nice guy, a great father, and wouldn't want to do harm to anyone.

LOL!  That's me!  I uber-competitive in everything, especially basketball.  I don't get mad at people if they suck but I do get mad at them if they don't give it their all, or at least play up to their abilities.  There is this one I guy I used to play with all the time, I haven't played basketball in over 3 years, who is better than me at everything but I beat him all the time because I have that desire to win.  He's a little taller, way stronger, he's wider, and he's a better shooter but I always kick his arse when it matters most.  If I need to get a rebound or hang on his shoulder to block a shot I will get it when I need to, I can't always get the better of him because he is truely better than me but I always get picked ahead of him.  There are two friends who are the same way, I don't mind going into "battle" with either of them because I know they want to win as much as I do, in fact one of them takes it a step further and he's my favorite team mate because we actually fight cause we care that much.  I know we would kick the sh#t out of Joe V and his "hoosiers-the-way-the-game-should-be-played" crew.