Let’s say that the Celtics go on to win one of these final two games. Does that mean Paul Pierce – or Kevin Garnett – is better than Kobe Bryant? Does it mean they want it more? Of course not. All it means is that the 2010 Celtics were better than the 2010 Lakers for two weeks in June.
What if the Lakers win? After all, all they need to do is protect home court. This is what they played all season for. And in order to do that, they need more from Kobe’s alleged supporting cast. He can’t rebound for them, or hit free throws for them, or stop them from taking ill-advised threes. (Well, he could do that, but it would be unprecedented.) Either way, a team will win this Finals.
As for Kobe’s legacy, well, that’s already been determined in the hearts and minds of journalists and fans and Hall of Fame voters everywhere. Is it possible that these next 48 minutes negate the past 45,000? As Kobe himself, might say: No. Not at all.
via SLAM ONLINE | » Stakes Is High?.
A selection of brilliant takes on what tonight means for the Kobester, the Beanster, the Beanorama, the Mambamatic, the… I’ll stop. SLAM Online can sometimes be all over the place, but they do employ some terrific writers. The above was from Russ BengtsonI also liked Myles Brown from the same article:
From the moment he slid those sunglasses off and announced his decision to go pro, he was perceived as a spoon fed primadonna. From the moment he entered the league alongside a man who would turn the marketing model on its ear, his racial identity has been questioned. From the moment he dared to question the work ethic of an established, but complacent superstar and the authority of a well decorated, but manipulaitve coach, he’s been deemed too ambitious. And from the moment he exited that hotel room, he surrendered the benefit of the doubt.
A series of moments, spliced into his highlight reel and the collective consciousness, the effects of which have left us with the man who stands here today, jaw jutted and eyes narrowed. A man who pretends not to give a fuck what you think while making it quite evident that he plays for your approval. Such is the dichotomy of being Kobe Bryant. For there is a distinct difference between being the one in the history book and being the one who writes it.
I tend to agree with the consensus of the piece, which is that tonight changes nothing for Kobe Bryant.
Take Game 5, for example. When I wrote about Bryant’s little barrage hurting the Lakers, immediately there were cries (including some from Brown) that the idea was absurd. That’s how people are with Kobe. If the jumpshots, the impossible step-back threes, the fist pumps, the jaw juts, the unbelievable work ethic resulting in out of this world performances delight you, then you’re going to think Kobe did what he had to do and in no way can scoring 38 points, including 19 in a quarter and 21 straight hurt you. You’re going to think it was another example of his greatness. Likewise, if something about Colorado rankled you, as unfair as that may be, you probably see it as selfishness. If your bias is based off disliking the Lakers or a perceived arrogance (that I doubt anyone would deny) of Bryant’s, then you similarly probably think it’s another example of how he hurts his team with his style. It’s just how it is. With each game we are proven right or wrong, and then the next game happens. The tide has certainly begun to abide in the last few years. Four rings is four rings, after all, and an MVP and 81 points and then a ring and maybe another will do that. But the consequences of being polarizing are that neither side will really surrender their viewpoint because of how much they disagree with the other side.
The piece about Bryant brought that out. Those that think there’s no way that taking 9 of your team’s first ten shots in a quarter could hurt you will say so. The big element I was trying to get across in the piece was that it was Jackson’s fault, not Bryant’s. That’s who Bryant is. And assuredly, if he’d kept it up or if the Lakers offense as a whole had just warmed back up after Bryant was done, it would have been a masterful performance for the ages. Things which were not under his control put that little outburst into context. And we’ll see the same debates raged if a similar series of events go down tonight. If Bryant goes down swinging, he’ll have gone down his way, believing he is the best and the best way for his team to win is for him to take over. And his fans will love him for it, and if he loses, his detractors will deride him for it.
Bryant’s place in history is secured, regardless. Those (of us) that root against him may not like it, but it is what it is. His accuser settled, he obviously loves his daughters, his team did nothing against the rules to obtain the talent they have, and he’s consistently been a part of championship teams throughout his career. The rings speak for themselves, as much as I hate that argument (Adam Morrison may end up with two, for God’s sake).
If you want to know what tonight means, in any real sense? It speaks something of this particular Lakers team. Just days ago I crowned them as great, and they still are. I believe that you’re a great team if you make the Finals, no matter the result. Those early 00′s Jersey teams? Great. Iverson’s Sixers? Great. I have an appreciation for it because that means that they are, in their given year, the two best teams in all of organized basketball. To say they were not great is simply foolish in my opinion. Tonight won’t alter the fact that they’re great. It will alter the impression of the mentality of this team. Nothing can erase 2009. They are a championship team, and that’s all there is to it. But it will leave a mark on this team as mentally weak and some people will pass of 2009 due to the KG injury. It’s inevitable. I don’t think it’s fair (that Magic team was terrific; thanks Vince Carter, by the way). But it is what it is. And a failure tonight could combust a fairly sensitive group of athletic individuals. We saw in 2004 what can happen when you lose a Finals. It’s unlikely, given these personalities aren’t as bombastic, but you simply can’t predict the future. And the best way to stay together is to prove no change is needed.
That said, I still like Lakers in 7. I’ve come this far doubting Boston, I might as well finish the job. I’ve seen Staples be the ruin of too many teams, despite their home crowd being the least effectual of any team over a 5 seed. They have the talent. They have the ability. They don’t have the coaching, but they don’t really need it. They need a few things to go their way, and it has been my experience that that scenario usually works out pretty well for LA.
Bryant remakes nothing of his legacy tonight. But he does have an opportunity to extend it.
